Bob, You'll know!! Is there any way to goto a page in a thread directly( or a specific post #?

You can go to a specific page in a thread by clicking on the page number once you bring up the thread. But only a few page numbers are displayed. So if it's a long thread the only way to do it is to step through a few pages at a time. Don't know of any way to access a given post unless you know the post # which you see at the bottom of every post.

I figgured out the "slow" way:) was just hoping ther was a quicker way! If I know a thread # is there a quick way to goto that reply? Most threads it doesn't matter. They aren't 226 pages,4500 posts. and counting:)

This is the url for your last post...
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=4405496#post4405496

It says at the bottom of your post that it's post #4503. But I don't see 4503 in that url. So even if we know a post #, I don't suppose we can go to it by creating a url with that number in it. Doesn't look like there's any way to go about it other than that slow way. But my geek skills are piss poor. Expert geeks (and there are many here) might know how to do it.

Originally posted by fisheggs
I figgured out the "slow" way:) was just hoping ther was a quicker way! If I know a thread # is there a quick way to goto that reply? Most threads it doesn't matter. They aren't 226 pages,4500 posts. and counting:)
If you look in the "address bar" at the top of your web browser you should see something like "&pagenumber=xxx" in the URL. You can go and replace the page number with whatever you want to jump directly to that page.

Well, OK, you may or may not see the page number in the URL, depending on how you got to the page. If you click a specific page number in the entry for this thread on the main "Digital Software Discussion and Reviews" page, then you should see it in the URL.

Good tip Sean. What I want to know is how did Oscar find that post on building a time machine so fast? I've tried searching for things in this thead and have given up.

I did find Bob's coney island sauce recipe though. Wasn't giving up on that.

Originally posted by fisheggs
Anyone else see/ remember the "Outer Limits" episode "To Serve Mankind"?:D


Actually, it was Twilight Zone:

The Twilight Zone episode, "To Serve Man," aired March 2, 1962. An alien race, the Kanamit, have come to earth. Mankind is overjoyed when they discover these visitors from another universe are well intentioned and kind. They provide great knowledge to cure disease, end war, and produce cheap power. After a meeting at the United Nations, a Kanamit accidently leaves a book behind, and mankind seizes the opportunity to learn the Kanamit language. Micheal Chambers, a U.S. decoding expert, immediately begins the long and laborious effort to translate the alien tongue. Countless hours later, Mr. Chambers is thrilled to discover the title of the book reads, "To Serve Man." The human race rejoices in the revelation that the Kanamits are here to serve them. Mr. Chambers, along with thousands of other humans, book trips to visit the Kanamit's home planet. Just as Mr. Chamber is about to board the ship, his assistant breaks through the crowd and begs him not to board. She has discovered the true intention of the book: It is a cookbook. Mr. Chambers is shoved onto the ship as the title, "To Serve Humans" takes on a whole new meaning

Originally posted by moore
Good tip Sean. What I want to know is how did Oscar find that post on building a time machine so fast? I've tried searching for things in this thead and have given up.


It was weird, I had to try it a few different ways. The 'Search This Thread' thing at the top of the thread doesn't seem to do a very good job. But the general search with the search narrowed down to just the 'Digital Software Discussion' seemed to do the trick.

Even so, it ain't no google. Even though I rememebered the thread and some of the words we had used, I had to try 3 or 4 times (waiting 20 secs each time) before I got a hit.

The Simpsons played on that one. The tentacled aliens had a book called "cooking humans"!! But then it turned out to be "cooking FOR humans". But, no, actually it was "cooking FORTY humans"!! Went on from there.

So now 4 hurricanes have struck Florida in a single season. I think I heard that the last time this happened was in 1886, and Texas was the unfortunate state. I wonder if this will put a damper on the huge annual influx of people moving to Florida.

Originally posted by rto
I wonder if this will put a damper on the huge annual influx of people moving to Florida.
Probably not, but the loose gaters might thin the herd :eek: ;)

Over the last few years there has been a boom in waterfront real estate prices here that was equalled only by the last stock market bubble.
Almost overnight that's now been blown away. And with predictions that these hurricanes will be a trend lasting for decades, no one in his right mind will want to invest in coastal property.
But it goes far beyond that. Once the roofing and tarps and tree branches finally settle, and we see what the increase in homeowner's insurance premiums is surely to be for all Floridians, not only will no one want to move into Florida, many here now will be wanting to move out.
One thing you will see a lot more of are the "hurricane proof" beach houses like the handful that have already been built and have weathered the storms without a scratch. If I was a younger man and ambitious I would be getting into building those right now. Easiest road to riches I've ever seen.

This was ground zero for the landfall of both Hurricane's Frances and now Jeane.
Notice the caption under those pics says the homes were valued here at from $700,000 to $20 million dollars. And look how low to the water it all was. Can you even imagine what this must like now?

http://www.sailfishpoint.com/

They have some really slick websites for all those beachfront properties down there don't they ?

So are these new "hurricane proof" houses made of reinforced concrete on 20 foot pillars with steel shutters over the windows, and rubber gaskets on every external penetration ? Decorator pill-boxes, if you will ?

Originally posted by RobertWood
Over the last few years there has been a boom in waterfront real estate prices here that was equalled only by the last stock market bubble.
Almost overnight that's now been blown away. And with predictions that these hurricanes will be a trend lasting for decades, no one in his right mind will want to invest in coastal property.


Back about 10 years ago, we had a major earthquake, fires, and riots in LA and housing prices got very soft. They have gone up about 250% (really)since then. They also tightened the building codes for earthquakes. BTW, we don't get hurricanes, the water is too cold, coming from Alaska. I prefer earthquakes to weather.

I figure the current batch of hurricanes will send the least coasters our this way unfortunately.

My guess is that the weather next year will be better and in about four years life will be back where it was with better codes so that damage is minimized in the future. I don't place much stock in long term weather prediction.

I sincerely hope you're right, Ken. Time will tell.

Two different "hurricane proof" beach houses weathered the recent storms, Todd. One on the Atlantic Coast. And one here on the Gulf Coast. This is some info on the one here.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6011773/
http://www.pensacolanewsjournal.com/news/life/home/style/sigler/photo1.jpg

This is all a brand new concept. As evidenced by the fact that this home's designer had not yet even made allowances for exiting the home once the breakaway staircases had disappeared.
Before six weeks ago, few people had any interest in this. I'm confident that you will now see a great many more designs come forth utilizing
all sorts of creative approaches. And some no doubt will provide something with a more aesthetically pleasing exterior.
BTW, this home's designer says this can be built per square foot for comparably the same cost as a conventional beach home. So economics
is also on it's side.

As I said, if I was still young and enterprising I would be out right now attempting to parlay this into something big. The first thing I would be doing is knocking on the doors of the insurance companies. I have little doubt that it would be easy to find one right about now which would be willing to partner on it and finance the development of the whole thing.
On this stretch of coast, most of the beach front homes have been destroyed. And the insurers now have a vested interest in putting people into this sort of thing instead of replacing the sticks of wood which have been blown away.

Question please?

Last night I had insomnia. Woke up and listed to most of an interview with British astronomer David Darling. One of the most interesting conversations I've yet heard on that radio show.
http://www.daviddarling.info/

Has anyone ever heard of this person? And do you know if he's thought of very kindly within the science community? Or is he considered fringe? Or what exactly?

He's legit, and I've heard of him. Never read any of his books, but that doesn't mean much. Seem to recall reading articles by him in Scientific American?? We need more people like him, who make science accessible and popular.

Sorry about the insomnia. Did you run out of CR?

Originally posted by RobertWood

As I said, if I was still young and enterprising I would be out right now attempting to parlay this into something big. The first thing I would be doing is knocking on the doors of the insurance companies

And maybe get some kind of free ride out of the federal government too. I don't know how to do it, but people are always out there getting huge blocks of grant money you don't even have to pay back.

You're still young enough to make yourself rich. Go for it Robert.

Originally posted by moore
He's legit, and I've heard of him. Never read any of his books, but that doesn't mean much. Seem to recall reading articles by him in Scientific American?? We need more people like him, who make science accessible and popular.



Interesting. In that case I really wish you and others would spring for the $6.95 to be able to tap into past shows for a month so you can then listen to last night's interview. I think you'll find it one of the most interesting and entertaining discussions relating to much of what we've talked about here that you'll ever find. He's given a lot of thought to what extraterrestrials might be like. And it's just a joy to listen to him. Real laid back and down to earth, unlike most of the obsessed and crazed folks who you usually hear talk about all that. Be sure and listen long enough until he gets to the part about the triangular shaped UFO's.
Go to the home page and click on "last night's show" in the upper left corner.
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/

Originally posted by RVonse

You're still young enough to make yourself rich. Go for it Robert.

No longer have the drive or the ambition, Bob. I'm in semi-retirement now. I've gotten too used to the free time I have.

Be sure and listen long enough until he gets to the part about the triangular shaped UFO's.

What does he say? Sorry, not gonna give Coast to Coast money. Remember that even Carl Sagan believed in UFOs.

It's one of those things which is almost impossible to convey without being there to appreciate hearing the spoken voice. But basically, the interview proceeds for a pretty long time and during that time we're hearing a scientist (one who requires evidence) explain his take on things as you described (making science accessible and popular). There is no indication that he is a "believer", UFO or otherwise.
And then out of the blue he casually states (sort of matter of factly) that many of his scientist colleagues are quietly convinced that recent sightings of what are being described as "triangular" shaped UFO's, are most likely the real mccoy.

p.s. please elaborate. I was of course aware that Sagan certainly believed that extraterrestrial intelligent life exists. But I always thought he pooh poohed the idea of UFO's being of extraterrestrial origin. Am I wrong to think that?

Originally posted by RobertWood
No longer have the drive or the ambition, Bob. I'm in semi-retirement now. I've gotten too used to the free time I have.

We can tell, you are gradually getting more and more philosophical. You need a good hobby like home theater while you are still in touch with reality.

I was so young when I lost touch with reality that I might as well have never been in touch with it because the period was too brief to have any lasting effect.

This is a very good example of that artist's "over confidence" that I was cautioning you about Todd.

I placed a frying pan on my front porch thinking that after the rain subsided I would drink some of the water and Ivan would be "part of me". (I never said I was the brightest)
http://*******.com/5uwqf

Can you imagine telling your guests that this painting is made with actual Hurricane Ivan water and wind??

http://i16.ebayimg.com/03/i/02/7a/01/ff_1_b.JPG

Hmmmm... Ended without so much as even one bid.

Shocking isn't it? And even after so many pleaded with him to sell it to them before the auction ended.

Originally posted by kelliot
I figure the current batch of hurricanes will send the least coasters our this way unfortunately.



Powerful earthquake strikes central California

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-09-28-calif-quake_x.htm

Thanks, but no thanks.

I too, was under the impression that Sagan didn't think there was much chance at all we are being visited by ETs.

Originally posted by RobertWood
And then out of the blue he casually states (sort of matter of factly) that many of his scientist colleagues are quietly convinced that recent sightings of what are being described as "triangular" shaped UFO's, are most likely the real mccoy.


James Randi is fond of saying that "a PhD is not an innoculation against foolishness". Josephson, a nobel laureate in physics, believes in homeopathic medicine, and that the water "remembers" what's been dissolved in it. Never mind that there's no evidence for that. There are many other examples.

This is why I keep harping on the credibility issue. It does not matter WHO says something and what background they have. It matters whether they can prove anything, or at least have an argument worth listening to.


p.s. please elaborate. I was of course aware that Sagan certainly believed that extraterrestrial intelligent life exists. But I always thought he pooh poohed the idea of UFO's being of extraterrestrial origin. Am I wrong to think that?

No, you're not wrong. Sagan said that of course he believed in UFOs - unidentified flying objects. He said that there was also a chance that they had extraterrestrial origin, but that the level of proof needed for such a remarkable discovery should be very high, and he hadn't seen anything remotely convincing.

Originally posted by moore
James Randi is fond of saying that "a PhD is not an innoculation against foolishness". Josephson, a nobel laureate in physics, believes in homeopathic medicine, and that the water "remembers" what's been dissolved in it. Never mind that there's no evidence for that. There are many other examples.

This is why I keep harping on the credibility issue. It does not matter WHO says something and what background they have. It matters whether they can prove anything, or at least have an argument worth listening to.





Point well taken. I still have hope though. Hope that I will have the answer to that one question before it's time for me to go to that big Wurlitzer jukebox shop in the sky (or down below whichever the case may be). If they would just see fit to abduct me one time. Maybe just a house call and not take me to the mother ship if that's too much bother. Just come down one night and we'll shoot the sh!t for a few minutes over a couple of cold ones on the back patio. Or even maybe just send me a telepathic message telling me "yes, we're here, you can stop wondering about it now." :)

I know our society has come a lomg way in the past 50 years, but do you guys think the world is ready to knowthe truth (provided there is a truth that has not been told regarding ET's?)

Gus

I really think some of us would be ready. I'm with Robert on this, there has never been a better time for us to learn our real place in the cosmos.

And the knowledge of real ET's might actually serve to create more peace and harmony between different nations. Who knows? I just don't see the downside.

For one thing, it would play havoc on our religious institutions. I don't know that alot of people would be willing to shed their convenient religious security blankets.

Gus

I'm not sure exactly what the fallout would be, but a certain amount of social upheaval would seem inevitable. ( One can imagine people worshiping the visitors and founding new "religions", along with some problematic implications for existing religions ) I think it's entirely possible that after enough time for the world to digest such a revelation, the net result would be positive: Yes, intelligent civilizations can survive the trials and tribulations of infancy. Yes, some means of spanning interstellar voids or inter-dimensional boundaries await discovery. No, we're not alone, etc.
Such a revelation, ( along with accompanying incontrovertible supporting evidence, of course ) would completely change our view of the universe and our place within it, but I think the species is sufficiently adaptable to survive and perhaps learn from it. However, assuming they ever have, or will visit the immediate neighborhood, I can't imagine why they would make their presence known to us in any formal, directly intentional fashion.

Slightly different subject, sorry, but I just ran across this:
http://www.futurefoundation.org/nty/nty_overview.html

Yeah, we'd probably better get off even oblique references to religion. :)

Originally posted by rto
I too, was under the impression that Sagan didn't think there was much chance at all we are being visited by ETs.

A visitor much more scary than any ET, and this one is real...

"Huge Asteroid to Fly Past Earth Wednesday"


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=96&e=3&u=/space/hugeasteroidtoflypastearthwednesday

b2b

I was just reading about the asteroid. Good thing it's going to miss, I'd realy like to know at least one answer to one any of the eternal questions before this ship sinks.

Gus

It's an excellent question, Gus. Would the knowledge that we are not alone in and of itself be too threatening? I suppose the devil would lie in the details to some degree. What if their presence be known but no communication was established? Would communication even be possible?And if they did communicate, would we learn of their purpose for visiting us? Would they want to interact with us? And would we feel too threatened to cooperate with them? Would they be willing to share their knowledge with us? Presumably they could advance our science and technology in inconceivable ways if they wished to do so. Would they? If not, why not?
Would they have anything to fear from us? Who, what and exactly where from are they? Or is it even possible for us to understand the answer to that?
In other words (the words of Professor Barnhart) "we would have about a million questions".
One thing is for certain regardless of who or what they would be, regardless of whether they came to help us or to eat us, regardless of whether or not there was even any interaction or communication, or any other consideration. With only the exception of the Beatles coming to America, the mere knowledge of their presence would be the most mind boggling thing in history. So the answer to your question is probably that it would reduce us all to hiding under rocks and carrying signs which say the end of the world is drawing near. If they are out there in those flying saucers (the real ones, not the hubcaps), I would imagine they know this and that could explain why they choose not to make their presence widely known.
Who knows.

Someday, we're going to have to go out and change the orbit of one of those things, and the earlier we can predict a potential problem, the easier the job of rectifying it will be. Certainly, we need to devote more resources to observation and course plotting of Earth-crossing asteroids. It would really be unfortunate, ( but somehow, almost amusingly ironic ) for our civilization to be wiped out by a mindless, uncaring piece of rock. The Earth would just go blithely on her way, and eventually the ecosystem would recover to once again produce a new paradigm of higher life-forms. Who knows, maybe the Monotremes are just biding their time. :D

Originally posted by Aliens
Powerful earthquake strikes central California

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-09-28-calif-quake_x.htm

Thanks, but no thanks.

6.0 is a nice shaker.
It was maybe 100 miles from me and I didn't feel it. The Northridge quake was close and I did feel it. It was scary, but when it was all over, my house had a few dry wall cracks.

It doesn't come close to the devastation in Fla.

The fires last year were a bit scarier, but other than lots of good visual effects, no damage to me. I wouldn't want a mountain home in the West for the fires. I live about a mile from the Reagan library and the fires got about a quarter of a mile from it.

Don't forget about volcanic eruptions. Mt. St. Helens seems to be "shakin all over". Then there is Mammoth Mountain. And Yellowstone is on top of a super-volcano.

Originally posted by rto
Someday, we're going to have to go out and change the orbit of one of those things, and the earlier we can predict a potential problem, the easier the job of rectifying it will be. Certainly, we need to devote more resources to observation and course plotting of Earth-crossing asteroids. It would really be unfortunate, ( but somehow, almost amusingly ironic ) for our civilization to be wiped out by a mindless, uncaring piece of rock. The Earth would just go blithely on her way, and eventually the ecosystem would recover to once again produce a new paradigm of higher life-forms. Who knows, maybe the Monotremes are just biding their time. :D

Here is a really close call. One this size could make a mess if it hit an urban area.

And most of the smaller ones go undetected. :eek:

"Earth Safe from Ultra-close Asteroid Flyby Today"

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/asteroid_flyby_040318.html

b2b

Originally posted by moore
Slightly different subject, sorry, but I just ran across this:
http://www.futurefoundation.org/nty/nty_overview.html

Moore, that looks like it might be pretty interesting. If it is even half as good as the Carl Sagan nova stuff then I will love it.

Would the knowledge that we are not alone in and of itself be too threatening?No. I suppose the devil would lie in the details to some degree. Yes.What if their presence be known but no communication was established? Perplexing.Would communication even be possible? No. And if they did communicate, would we learn of their purpose for visiting us? No.Would they want to interact with us? No. And would we feel too threatened to cooperate with them? Yes. Would they be willing to share their knowledge with us? NO. Presumably they could advance our science and technology in inconceivable ways if they wished to do so. Would they? No. If not, why not? Would they have anything to fear from us? Yes. Who, what and exactly where from are they? They communicate using what we call smells, so there is no phonetic name for them. They look to us like slime mold. They hail from Eta Eridani. Or is it even possible for us to understand the answer to that? No.

Originally posted by kelliot
6.0 is a nice shaker.



I’ve always viewed being in an earthquake as one of the most out of control feelings you could have. With a hurricane, you know it’s coming and can prepare the best you can, but with an earthquake there is no warning, and there you are, standing on moving land with no control whatsoever, and you don’t know when or if it will ever stop. The time during one of those must be terrifying and one of total helplessness (not to say being in a hurricane isn’t, but one of a different nature).

Being in an earthquake has always been a pretty big fear of mine, second only to being in an airplane at 35,000’ and knowing it's going to crash. Now I can go to bed with those lovely thoughts in mind.:eek:

Originally posted by RVonse
Moore, that looks like it might be pretty interesting. If it is even half as good as the Carl Sagan nova stuff then I will love it.

I hope it gets picked up and produced quickly. In HD of course!

Originally posted by Aliens
With a hurricane, you know it’s coming and can prepare the best you can, but with an earthquake there is no warning,

That is the big difference now. But it should be noted that it applies only to a relatively recent period of history. Before ships had on-board telegraphy, there was no warning. The wind showed up and quickly began to intensify and the water began to rise before there was any time either to prepare or to evacuate.

Originally posted by Aliens
Being in an earthquake has always been a pretty big fear of mine, second only to being in an airplane at 35,000’ and knowing it's going to crash. Now I can go to bed with those lovely thoughts in mind.:eek:

The difference is the timing. Earthquakes usually just last a few seconds, and most people (US anyway) come out of it just fine. If an airplane starts plummeting from that height in can take 5-10 minutes for the end to come, and chances of survival or escaping major injury are pretty bad. That would really really really suck. I mean, you soil yourself the first 30 seconds, and then ....

It's that falling thing that's the bogey man for me too. I wonder how many times and in what detail their whole lives flashed in front of these guys on the way down?

http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/news/030905/tower.shtml

One of the big questions is would aliens adhere to "The Prime Directive" ( a human invention), slavery and subjugation (another, uniquely human invention:()(I hope!) At present, it's an unknown: that can scare folk. If they're really out there I'm for the whole story. It might play holy hell in some quarters but the way humans have adapted and thrived( perhaps too well:() we actually can be intellegent beings. ( Note to self: Don't let them see Star Wars threads!!!:))

Coming up shortly on amcoasttocoast. Astronomers and planetary scientists talking about the asteroid.

It is amazing how oblivious we humans are, given all the technological advances we have made. The "near miss" asteroids are obviously probes sent by superior beings. This large one is actually a space-time ship carrying tourists that hope to catch a glimpse of "The Humans in the Mist". Also, the earthquakes are clearly an encoded means of communication, whose timing, magnitude, and intangible relationships provide the answers to all questions in the universe.

Originally posted by Aliens
being in an airplane at 35,000’ and knowing it's going to crash.

This link tells the story of an incident where they ran out of fuel at 41,000’ and had to use the plane as a glider. There is a more detailed pdf file at this link about flight 143. I recently saw the movie that was based on this incident, which had to be a terrifying experience.

http://www.wadenelson.com/gimli.html

I watch too damn many plane disasters on TLC, Discovery and National Geographic for my own good.

I have to travel to Cincinnati next week, so I'm avoiding all the airplane disaster posts to preserve my own sanity. I always find my religion at 35000 feet.:)

Gus

I think the biggest argument that we're probably alone in the universe is that we see no evidence otherwise. None, nada, zilch. That and the fact that the odds that a bunch of amino acids would combine into proteins (not that unusual) and then "figure out" how to become self-replicating (not very likely) are so astronomical as to be basically impossible. Yet, here we are. Nobody yet has a clue as to how that happened, other than if you combine these things in every possible way, eventually one combo "works". Presto, elementary bacteria. The rest is history. :)

If you take as a workable hypothesis that it would take at least 600 genes, or bits of primordial RNA to form a self-replicating molecule (as some scientists have speculated), then the odds of this happening are vastly greater than all the stars in the Milky Way galaxy. Then, add in the difficulty of surviving and evolving to intelligent, self-aware, space faring civilizations, and it's no wonder we don't see any evidence of intelligent life elsewhere.

Some who respect science yet still practice religious faith see this as de facto proof of Gods existence (somebody or something had to start the ball-of-life rolling). Then again, humans have always used religion to explain that which cannot yet be comprehended and understood. Perhaps this ultimate conundrum is simply another case of that...?

Nevertheless, I have no doubt that even this question will eventually yield to the inexorable advance of human knowledge. I just don't expect any help from little green men. ;)

Intersting. I've always heard of mathematics used to explain why extraterrestrial life is inevitable. This is the first time I've heard of math used to explain the opposite.

Gus

Aliens,

Thanks for not posting that last night. What a story!

As Pearson began gliding the big bird, Quintal "got busy" in the manuals looking for procedures for dealing with the loss of both engines. There were none...
- Boeing never expected anyone to try and glide one of their jumbo jets.


I'd never be able to fly again if I were on that flight.

archi,

You could be right. Paleontologist Peter Ward and astronomer Donald Brownlee are now at the forefront of this debate. They've teamed up to maintain that Earth is an extremely rare occurrence in the Universe.

But it's a pretty big Universe. The only thing we've really ever seen of it is the surface of planets in our own solar system from a pretty great distance even under the best of circumstances. And we've conducted only a cursory examination below the surface of only one of those planets (actually I guess we've peered a little below the surface of a couple of other planets). That's all.
Don't you think it might be still a little too early to think we have a handle on the whole entire gargantuan Universe?
Think about it like this. Say you're sitting on the corner of Elm and Maple. All that's visible to you is the mailbox and the traffic light and the fish market on that corner. That's all you can see and that's all you know. Would it be possible from that to know what is in every nook and cranny of the world? Multiply that comparison a million fold and then do you still think we now know much at all about what's in this whole Universe?

Originally posted by Aliens
flight 143.

http://www.wadenelson.com/gimli.html


Jeebus!!

Do you remember this one?
http://www.aloha.net/~icarus/243a.jpg

http://www.aloha.net/~icarus/

Here is more evidence of my "Asteroid/Alien" theory. These almost Earth-like rocks have been used to very cleverly conceal intergalactic communication parabolas all over the world. I would wager that carbon dating would place the age of these menacing miniroids at close to the age of the universe!

http://www.dishking.com/accessories/boulders.jpg

Originally posted by RobertWood
Do you remember this one?
http://www.aloha.net/~icarus/243a.jpg

...and that was the last time that B&M sponsored their 12 Hour Baked Bean Aeronautics Extravaganza!

Originally posted by RobertWood


Do you remember this one?
http://www.aloha.net/~icarus/243a.jpg

http://www.aloha.net/~icarus/

Saw that movie too. Just way too much time to contemplate the potential results.

I just moved from nearby Dulles Airport and they flew over our house all the time. I was on my deck when one blew an engine just as it passed over and it scared the crap out of me. They returned to Dulles without incident, but I was always paranoid one would crash (not into our house) and I would see it happen. I must have half-a-dozen dreams a year about plane crashes, so when I must travel, I’m always apprehensive. Interesting to note, I used to love to fly, but those darn dreams have wedged their way into my psyche and now give me so much anxiety I need to take another vacation upon my return. Even though it’s the safest mode of transportation it doesn’t relieve my anxiety.

Sorry Gus.

Keep all this in mind when you're about to step on that elevator that goes to outer space. :eek: :eek:

Speaking of elevators to space, do you suppose that they will have a display that shows what "floor" you're at? Will the skip #13? #1313? :D

I think I'll skip 13. Will also skip 2-12, and 14 through 27,546. Might want to see what it feels like on 1 though. But only if they can assure me the power cord is unplugged.

What was that ya'll were saying earlier about the profit motive taking us into space?
Yep, it seems that Microsoft is no longer satisfied with controlling one lousy little planet. Looks like they're now poised to go where no operating system has gone before.

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aBoIUUvvWjow&refer=us

moore,

This quote is found on another page on the Foundation for the Future website you linked us to. A page about Walter Kistler's book entitled Reflections on Life.

"The implications of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle for physics, philosophy, and even humankind’s comprehension of reality exceed, he believes, even those of Einstein’s theories of special and general relativity. "

In doing a little googling to attempt to gain some rudimentary understanding of "Heisenberg's uncertainty principal", I can across this statement...

"Schrodinger’s Cats Paradox and Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle - Two Ideas that Changed the World

I cannot seem to find a place on the web which makes this "accessible and popular". What is to be found is so far over my head that if it was water I would have already drowned. Can someone please help explain this "uncertainty principle" in layman's language?

I've found this...

The Schrodinger cat thought experiment involves having a cat in a box, along with a vial of poison gas. The vial can be broken open, releasing the gas, by a hammer attached to a trigger mechanism. The trigger mechanism consists of an unstable particle of some sort, say a radioactive atom, which has a probability of, say 1/2 of decaying in any particular hour. If the particle decays, the hammer breaks the vial, releasing the gas and killing the cat. If it doesn't, the cat lives. (Schrodinger obviously wasn't a cat lover.)

The rules of quantum mechanics (standard Copenhagen interpretation) say that until someone looks at, or measures the state of the particle, it can exist in a superposition of states. The base states for the particle are "decayed" and "not decayed", but it can also exist in a combination of the two states, in a sense, being decayed and not decayed simultaneously.

Since the particle determines whether or not the cat lives, we can carry the quantum state through to the cat level and say that before anyone opens the box at the end of the hour, the cat can exist in the superposition of states "live cat" and "dead cat", in a sense being both alive and dead at the same time.

Not many people today seriously believe that this type of thing actually happens. Neither did Schrodinger. The question that arises, then, is that since there is a lot of evidence that this sort of thing does happen for atomic sized objects, how do we make the transition from the odd quantum world to our common sense, everyday macroscopic world?

Say what!!!

The mere act of observing an action can/might/will affect the action so precise measurements/ predictions are "impossable". Damm! 2nd edit:(. this refers to Heisenberg Uncertainty Principles. The cat thing (quick kids, get out of the room!! Bootsy! Spot!, out!!!! you too Stinky!!!) OK now I can talk:) like above, put it in a box. As long as it doesn't "do" anything you don't know if it's alive( and just not hungry:) like thats gonna happen:)) or dead until you open the box, and opening the box may have precipated the untimely demise poor pussy:( Hope this helps:)

As God is my witness, I thought science made sense.

Originally posted by fisheggs
can/might/will

Well, I think we covered all of the bases there.:)

I'm a union man:) You bet I cover my behind!!! And that's why they call it "The UNCERTAINITY Principle:).

Don't worry about the Schrodinger Cat thing. To be honest, I think the whole "Copenhagen interpretation" is pure nonsense, and I am by no means alone in the scientific community. It is meant as a framework for understanding quantum mechanics, but leads to completely frivolous stuff like the cat-in-the-box.

At the level of the very small, things no longer work "classically", in the way Newton basically described. Electrons, neutrons, photons, etc. are not little hard balls. They also aren't exactly waves. They act like a mixture of the two. This is hard to conceive, but when you measure them that's what you get. We can't really understand the quantum world only by analogy with our familiar, macroscopic world.

The uncertainty principle comes in when we want to measure two parameters of one of these things at the same time, like speed and position. It turns out the better you know the speed, the worse you know the position, and vice versa. Again, this seems weird but comes as a consequence of the basic properties of quantum systems.

I wonder what Kistler thinks is so profound about all of that, though.

"At the level of the very small, things no longer work "classically", in the way Newton basically described. Electrons, neutrons, photons, etc. are not little hard balls. They also aren't exactly waves. They act like a mixture of the two. This is hard to conceive, but when you measure them that's what you get. We can't really understand the quantum world only by analogy with our familiar, macroscopic world."

This will probably sound ridiculous. But that's never stopped me before.
It reminds me of a lifelong conundrum I've had to face. Believe it or not, I'm actually an extremely competent technician. Of sorts. Early in life I had a burning interest in how electrical devices function. That more than anything is what got me into jukeboxes, pinball machines etc. But at the time they were all "electromechanical" in nature. I took to electromechanical designs like a dog in heat. I could look at contact relays and step switches and "see" what was happening. I quickly became so proficient in troubleshooting that junk that I worked as an independent contractor repairing the old amusement operators' equipment because they were usually too drunk to hold a soldering iron anyway. Plus I could convince them to pay me by giving me the old "junk" they had lying around which they didn't value (valuable antique jukeboxes and such). It was a sweet deal. And I made a lot of money. For a while that is.

Then along about 1978 my world turned upside down. An operator called me in to troubleshoot and repair his new solid state Bally pinball machine. When I looked in that thing I could no longer "see" sh!t. All of a sudden I was a fish out of water. What I saw was a damn microprocessor with all of these heiroglyphics on the schematic. Where I had learned the electromechanical stuff by watching the cams and the blade switches open and close, I couldn't see squat of what was happening inside that microprocessor.
I took that pinball machine back to my shop and I screwed with it for days.
Never fixed it, never even understood it.

Looks like I'm gonna be up against it trying to understand this quantum stuff too. And for pretty much the same reason.

I took to electromechanical designs like a dog in heat.

That must have hurt ;)

Seriously, it requires a certain level of abstraction to really grasp quantum mechanics. For me it required futzing with the equations and 'seeing' the results, just like you did with the relays. But I bet if you did some modern physics experiments you'd get some of it Bob. Whether it would be worth it or not is another issue.

Maybe you just needed to switch out that microprocessor Bob. Kind of hard to work on one with a soldering iron. :)

You know, I think you just put your finger on it, m. "Abstraction". That's the same thing that happened when Jackson Pollock got a few beers in him and slung the paint around the room. :D

Actually, Todd, I did finally figure out to replace the microprocessor as well as those other evil little components. I learned to do that only because I had to keep eating and paying the light bill.
But it still galls me that I cannot see what's happening inside that thing. It's beyond an abstraction. It's like being blind.

It's like this.
First we went from an analog to a digital world. And now we're about to go from a digital to a quantum world.
It's just too much for an old redneck to try to take in in one lifetime.

Originally posted by RobertWood
[bThen along about 1978 my world turned upside down.

The same thing happened at that same period time to a lot of other people too. From 1975-1978 I worked at a television shop trying to earn some extra money for college. I remembered a whole lot of of bitching by the older "tube" guys trying to fix the new solid state stuff that was just coming out. The way they acted you would think they were trying to fix an alien spacecraft. They were fish out of water too.

So you weren't alone.

Yep, a lot of us had to cope with that transition. The telephone guys, eventually the car guys, you name it.
You being a jukebox buff will know that before 1980, jukebox repairmen were known as "jukebox mechanics". That's when we became "technicians".

The way I see it's all Bill Gates doing. He was the one who delivered the software. It was that software that took the microprocessor from being just a ham radio operator's playtoy to becoming the little engine that now drives the whole world.
The only consolation is that, once we go to quantum, he'll probably become a fish out of water then too. What goes around comes around.

Before we totally leave old 'Scroedinger's Cat' :

I just wanted to point out the main distinction that it attempts to make:

As you know, the idea is that the cat is in the sealed box and since you haven't opened it, there is a random unpredictable possiblity that the vial opened causing the cat to die.

So in our macro view of the world: The cat is either alive or its dead but you don't know which it is until you open the box.

BUT, in the copenhagen view of the atomic world: The cat is BOTH alive AND dead. The fuzzy wave function straddles both possibilites and both of them exist simultaneously (a super-position of states)

BTW this is the very behaviour they wish to exploit for quantum encryption, quantum computing etc.

I'll have to admit that this is intriguing. I think I'm starting to get this picture (with heavy emphasis on "just starting").
And I'm beginning to see that our fixation with the "macro" is itself what presents the roadblock.
If we just start from scratch without making any comparison to our macro world, then I can grasp the concept that something can exist in two states simultaneously.
But when Schroedinger starts talking about being both alive and dead simultaneously, that just serves to confuse me.

I know the hurricanes are now history. And being replaced by volcanoes. Which is as it should be (and believe me a welcome relief it is for some of us).
But before Hurricane Ivan becomes but a distant memory, I would like to share one little anecdote with you.

There is a community south of me on the penninsula between the barrier island and the mainland called Tiger Point. Many of the homes are on man made canals and beside a golf course. The golf course is now littered with sofas, refrigerators and other household belongings because the storm surge washed through most of the houses and carried the items on out with it.
Many of the people in these homes failed to evacuate because no one ever expected the water to get so high in the canals. What happened to one family is something that no Hollywood screenwriter could ever concoct.

It was a family of four with two young children. As the storm approached the water quickly rose to the level of the kitchen counters inside their home. They noticed numerous fish in the water.
The children became hysterical. The father was also panicky (who could blame him) because there was no way to know how high the water would rise. He quickly struggled to get the children up onto a kitchen table to keep them above the water. Eventually it became evident that when it got a little above the height of the counters, it stopped rising. But the children were still very upset.
The father then thought of a way to calm them. He walked/swam to the garage and retrieved fishing poles. The family spent the next 5 hours all up on the kitchen table fishing in the lake inside their home.
By the time the storm started to subside, the children were fine. Actually smiling. And actually had caught some fish inside their home.

p.s. I admit that hurricane proof "dome home" seen earlier in the thread was funky looking. But they don't have to look any different from a regular home. Check this one out.
http://*******.com/4qv6p

Originally posted by RobertWood
jukebox repairmen were known as "jukebox mechanics". That's when we became "technicians".


And garbage collectors became 'sanitation workers,' and your used car became a 'previously owned' one. Anything to make us all feel cozy and secure.:rolleyes:

Originally posted by moore
It turns out the better you know the speed, the worse you know the position, and vice versa.
Sounds like every hotrod owner's ideal design for a radar deflector ;)

Originally posted by archiguy
I think the biggest argument that we're probably alone in the universe is that we see no evidence otherwise. None, nada, zilch.

If you take as a workable hypothesis that it would take at least 600 genes, or bits of primordial RNA to form a self-replicating molecule (as some scientists have speculated), then the odds of this happening are vastly greater than all the stars in the Milky Way galaxy. Then, add in the difficulty of surviving and evolving to intelligent, self-aware, space faring civilizations, and it's no wonder we don't see any evidence of intelligent life elsewhere.

Nevertheless, I have no doubt that even this question will eventually yield to the inexorable advance of human knowledge. I just don't expect any help from little green men. ;)


It's possible that we represent the technological vanguard of galactic intelligence, and someday, we'll be the "LGM" lurking in the skies of other worlds, leaving nothing behind but anecdotal, and/or limited physical evidence of our existence It's also possible that the few advanced civilizations present in our galaxy long ago moved beyond radio communications, and those bubbles of radiation passed by the Earth millions of years ago; or that technological civilizations almost always self-destruct, leaving a brief window of electro-magnetic evidence betraying their passing. The lack of a signal doesn't prove much of anything, except perhaps, that the galaxy hasn't teemed with beings similar to ourselves with a comparable level of technology.

I once had a debate with a favorite relative ( who happens to be a neurologist ) about intelligence. I took the position that tool-making wasn't necessarily a prerequisite for a creature to meet an alternative definition of advanced intelligence, and that our ego-centric, inherently limited perspective leads to a very narrow set of criteria on which we base the popular definition of this term.

What if we represent an aberration, a departure from an unknown "norm" more common throughout the Cosmos ? Is it possible that creatures who exploit technology as a survival strategy are extremely rare, but that intelligence itself is not so unusual ? A brief description of what we define as meeting the criteria for an advanced, intelligent species would include some kind of cognitive organ analogous to our brain, along with an anatomical structure capable of manipulating matter, and creating tools. Some kind of sensory apparatus, enabling the "visualization" and useful function of the tools would also be a requirement, as well as some form of communication, IE; language, so cooperating members of the species could build more complicated structures and devices, create a documented record for others to follow, etc.

But what if a being existed who met most, but not all of these criteria ? What if it had no means of making tools, but possessed many of the other qualities I outlined above ?

What if this creature possessed a form of communication capable of subtle nuance, yet extreme range; an innate, comprehensive awareness, not only of it's immediate surroundings, but the environment as a whole; the capacity to emote; care for, and protect not only those with whom it shares genes, but unrelated members of the community; a sensory apparatus capable of "imaging" the internal mechanisms of living organisms, along with an intuitive understanding of correct function; an elaborate, continuously developed "oral" history of "culture' containing the collected experiences of both contemporary members of the "society" as well as ancestors; an aesthetic sensibility related to those experiences, along with an evolving way of expressing them; a physical form totally in harmony with the environment, capable of rapid, efficient locomotion, making artificial enhancement unnecessary. Of course, my inspiration for this musing derives from the Cetaceans who inhabit our oceans. I'm not suggesting that they possess all of these qualities, only the remote possibility that they, or some creature similarly limited by physical structure might, and if they did, it could reasonably qualify them for a definition of advanced intelligence differing from current thinking.

Many people wish for humanity to explore space, as a means to avoid extinction. Extinction is as inevitable for every species, as death is for individuals. If we go out among the stars, we may extend our survival beyond the billions of years left in our local star, but eventually, we will disappear, with no record of our passing ( unless there is some Immortal, immutable form of universal memory. :) ) Immortality as a species is impossible, unless we can somehow escape space-time, and the "big crunch", or the eventual dissipation of energy in a universal "heat death"

Perhaps truly wise, enlightened species choose to explore, but then mold themselves to live in harmony with different environments, rather than stripping them of all their natural resources in an endless, ultimately empty cycle of creation and destruction. Just a thought.

It's an age old trap people fall into, Todd. And it's closely related to the dispute that got this whole thread going to begin with.
Ward and Brownlee peeked out the window for a few seconds and took a quick glance. They didn't see another Earth. They didn't see more Earthlings. They didn't see the very narrow criteria they've establised as the prerequisite for "intelligent life".
Like so many before them, it's just too difficult for them to try to think outside of that box. Because if they do so, then they eventually have to
say "We don't yet know what's out there". Instead, they took the easy road. The one where always having an answer, always having finality and closure, is paramount and sacrosanct. The fear of not knowing is a powerful fear.

Well put Robert

Back to extraterrestrial life.... good post rto!
Don't know if anyone caught "Origins" on PBS the last couple of nights but last night they covered this issue in some detail. They mentioned cephelopods (sp?) like octopuses (octopie?) and cuttlefish who possess the most amazing camouflage ability, and how much processing power this kind of thing requires in their "primitive" brains. Intelligent life elsewhere, if it exists, may indeed be nothing like we can even imagine. That being said, carbon is one of the most common substances in the galaxy and any life forms based on it may thus be recognizable by us.

Originally posted by moore
archiguy,

Please wipe out that last post. We know what's happening and different people here have different opinions. We don't want the thread locked.

Done. When I heard that news this morning I started fuming and haven't stopped. But you're probably right.

Geez. I was kinda hoping someone would disagree with some of my post, at least the final, really sappy, tree-hugging sentiment. :(

I think your post got pulled back over the page barrier. Plus it's long and thoughtful. Takes time to digest. I like the concept though of a race that is intelligent but has no tool making capacity, that we are freaks in that regard.

You never saw Flipper make a hammer or a saw out of those coral rocks out back of Porter Ricks' place. But he was sure a smart little booger. Whenever Porter would say to him "Flipper, go find Bud", he always knew exactly what Porter was telling him.

There is anecdotal evidence that they somehow sense disabilities and certain internal anomalies in children who swim with them. This would be extremely difficult ti verify, but It's an intriguing possibility. They really are extraordinary, beautiful creatures, and unquestionably deserve our best conservation efforts. The sonar equipment on our subs is laughably primitive in comparison to theirs, and we're just beginning to understand how incredibly sophisticated that aptitude really is.

In the "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" 'trilogy', the fourth book was called "So Long and Thanks for all the Fish"

That was the final message from the dolphins before they left Earth (moments before it was destroyed) For years they had attempted to establish communication with us but we just kept interpreting it as them jumping through hoops and over poles and stuff. Finally they gave up, trying to tell us about the imminent destruction and left.

All humans save two, were destroyed.

Originally posted by Oscar
In the "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" 'trilogy', the fourth book was called "So Long and Thanks for all the Fish"

That was the final message from the dolphins before they left Earth (moments before it was destroyed) For years they had attempted to establish communication with us but we just kept interpreting it as them jumping through hoops and over poles and stuff. Finally they gave up, trying to tell us about the imminent destruction and left.

All humans save two, were destroyed.

Sad story, but possibly more truth to it than we will ever know.

A little known fact - Dolphins hate porpoises and will often gang up and bully them and attack them.

The question is why ?

Originally posted by FoxyMulder
A little known fact - Dolphins hate porpoises and will often gang up and bully them and attack them.

The question is why ?
Because the dolphins just can't stand it that their chicks dig the porpoise dudes...

http://www.dolphinadventures.us/images/dolphinlove.jpg

rto, your "Cetacean" post is highly speculative, and there is no evidence to support the idea of self-aware consciousness in the absence of tool-making in the development of a species. In fact, the evidence points to a synergistic relationship between brain development and tool-making in humans. There is absolutely no direct empirical evidence to support any of these ideas, and your thoughts on this matter are therefore, utter nonsense.

I think Carl Sagan had a thing for dolphins. Bordering on weirdness. No joke.

:confused: :eek:

Originally posted by rto
rto, your "Cetacean" post is highly speculative, and there is no evidence to support the idea of self-aware consciousness in the absence of tool-making in the development of a species. In fact, the evidence points to a synergistic relationship between brain development and tool-making in humans. There is absolutely no direct empirical evidence to support any of these ideas, and your thoughts on this matter are therefore, utter nonsense.

Originally posted by rto
:confused: :eek:

I hope this not an indication that the Time Machine thread has taken it's toll on you and you've finally lost it. It's understandable. But we sure will miss you. Be sure and cooperate with the ward nurses and don't miss your medication. When I do that they get really mean.

I know this is a few pages old, but it's my favorite "geeky" joke:

In front of the Physics Department Building there is one of those campus map / information signs most colleges have. There's a red arrow announcing "you are here". Below, someone has scrawled, "but do you know my velocity?"

Originally posted by Aliens
Sad story, but possibly more truth to it than we will ever know.

Actually, "So Long and Thanks for all the Fish" was a work of fiction and it was a comedy (a funny comedy at that). And maybe, just maybe, if the world hadn't been destroyed we WOULD have been able to find out in time, had we not been so hard headed. ;)

Now I think that rto is onto something here, and Douglas Adams has very pointedly illustrated that we ignore our cetaceous friends at our own peril. :eek:

Originally posted by rto
rto, your "Cetacean" post is highly speculative, and there is no evidence to support the idea of self-aware consciousness in the absence of tool-making in the development of a species. In fact, the evidence points to a synergistic relationship between brain development and tool-making in humans. There is absolutely no direct empirical evidence to support any of these ideas, and your thoughts on this matter are therefore, utter nonsense. :D My apologies, rto. But I just don't have the energy to get into this stuff anymore. I'm all master-debated out. I'm sure noone would care, or be the wiser, if you took both sides yourself though.

"I'd like to buy an argument."
"Oh I'm sorry, this is Abuse."
-- M. Python

http://www.gonemovies.com/WWW/WanadooFilms/Thriller/nightZombies3.jpg

My will has been broken and I've rejoined the ranks of the opinionless walking bohemian undead (with nice suits). Hopefully Milla Jovovich or Sienna Guillory will rescue and/or put me out of my misery before it's too late.

[homer voive] mmmmmmmmmm! Milla Jooovovvvich!! [/homer voice]

Gus

Originally posted by RobertWood
I hope this not an indication that the Time Machine thread has taken it's toll on you and you've finally lost it. It's understandable. But we sure will miss you. Be sure and cooperate with the ward nurses and don't miss your medication. When I do that they get really mean.

No Bob, nothing in life made me screwy, I was born that way. However, I really am of two minds about this kind of speculative thinking. It's fun, but really doesn't mean much without supporting evidence.

Originally posted by ADU
:D My apologies, rto. But I just don't have the energy to get into this stuff anymore. I'm all master-debated out.[/I]

You read my mind. ;) and I'm disappointed; but more so, since you haven't been posting here as frequently of late.

Well, thanks you for that. Sometimes my fingers just get tired of expressing thoughts and opinions though. :) A couple random musings though re some of the current subjects on the table...A little known fact - Dolphins hate porpoises and will often gang up and bully them and attack them.

The question is why ?It is a bit unsettling to realize that dolphins could have their darker side too. And perhaps need to vent their "anger" or flex their muscles against a weaker species. If Carl Jung were still around, it would be interesting to hear his take on this. Darwinians would probably say it's because they're competing for a similar evolutionary niche. Sergio Leone would probably call it bad blood between different clans.

In terms of self-awareness... how do they perform in the mirror test? Can they tell they're seeing themselves?

Do dolphins or aliens have a sense of humor? Would a more intelligent lifeform have a more advanced sense of humor, kind of like Super-Seinfelds? Has this been factored into our quest to find ETs?

Re tool-making, intelligence and cetacea... Aquatic Ape theorists would probably say that it was the aquatic/semi-aquatic phase that was responsible for the leap in intelligence, and tool-making/using would be unlikely to impossible without it, which would probably support the notion of widespread but not especially dexterous or communicative (on an interstellar/interplanetary scale) aquatic smartie-pants elsewhere in the cosmos.

http://www.geocities.com/jcfan21/spongebob.gif

They all look alike to me.

Originally posted by ADU
Would a more intelligent lifeform have a more advanced sense of humor, kind of like Super-Seinfelds? Has this been factored into our quest to find ETs?



What an excellent point, ADU! I think you may be the first one to ever contemplate that. At least that I'm aware of. Will the aliens have a sense of humor? Everything we've ever considered about this has been so fricking serious. Wouldn't that be just about the ultimate. Aliens coming down here to crack jokes. Jebus.

p.s. but what if like those other aliens, the French, their idea of what's funny turns out to be Jerry Lewis? Lordy.

JERRY: I think Superman probably has a very good sense of humor.
GEORGE: I never heard him say anything really funny.
JERRY: But it's common sense. He's got super strength, super speed.. I'm sure he's got super humor.
GEORGE: You would think that, but either you're born with a sense of humor, or you're not. It's not going to change even if you go from the red sun of Krypton all the way to the yellow sun of the Earth.
JERRY: Why? Why would that one area of his mind not be affected by the yellow sun of Earth?
GEORGE: I don't know but he ain't funny.

ALIEN: Give me a double order of alpha centaurian porpoise soup. And make it snappy.
SOUP NAZI: No soup for you. You banned for life. You velly bad. You leave now.

Originally posted by ADU

Re tool-making, intelligence and cetacea... Aquatic Ape theorists would probably say that it was the aquatic/semi-aquatic phase that was responsible for the leap in intelligence, and tool-making/using would be unlikely to impossible without it, which would probably support the notion of widespread but not especially dexterous or communicative (on an interstellar/interplanetary scale) aquatic smartie-pants elsewhere in the cosmos.



While I can see how an aquatic lifeform might evolve into a very intelligent species I just can not envision any aquatic lifeform developing and using tools. You just can't build a fire under water nor can you readily chisel rocks into spears like our ancestors learned on dry land. The medium is wrong. And if a species doesn't partake in the first primary steps we experienced with our primitive tools, how on earth would they ever incrementally advance themselves into space travel? Personally I just can't envision it

On the new show Star Trek "Enterprise", they show these advanced Aquatic aliens that swim around in their star ships. But it just goes past the point of plausibility for me. I just don't expect to be visited by any sea creature aliens no matter how intelligent their brains might be.

Originally posted by RVonse
The same thing happened at that same period time to a lot of other people too. From 1975-1978 I worked at a television shop trying to earn some extra money for college. I remembered a whole lot of of bitching by the older "tube" guys trying to fix the new solid state stuff that was just coming out. The way they acted you would think they were trying to fix an alien spacecraft. They were fish out of water too.
You just described my dad. He's an OLD school radio/TV man. He can build those tube amps that only 'vinyl' purists love, but he's no longer interested. Wish I picked up on that stuff.

What happens when the Immortal shows up at the warehouse where the feds are awaiting his arrival? I don't need (or even want) to know yet what comes after that. Just that part. Can't you just tell me that one part?

Bob, beware, because I can't answer your question without revealing much of the plot.


They're not waiting for "The Immortal" , but one of the protagonists who authored a document which got the whole investigation started. "The Immortal" is a fiction Bob, an on line character created in an effort to elicit information indirectly from someone who a personality profile indicated had an interest in UFOs, and apparently either isn't aware they are an alien, or "simply" has detailed information about a device which analysis at government labs indicates could only have originated from an extraterrestrial source. This will all be revealed in a quick sequence of scenes which will ( hopefully ) turn the audience on their ear. Instead of a group of protagonists being influenced by an on line alien, THEY all Unknowingly carry something within them, who's ultimate purpose is unknown. Tom reacts to "The Immortal's" reply to his query about computers with shock because HE wrote the document which is quoted to begin with. You asked for it Bob :) Question is, do you like it ?

Watch out for when those dolphins get just a little "too happy" that ain't no fin your holding onto :)

I like it.

Do you want to know the rest ?

Only in the screenplay form. Not the cliff notes version.

:D I guess I'll actually have to finish it for that, but I honestly don't think anyone else is gonna want to read it. I'll do it for you though, since you've been so supportive, plus, my wife refuses to look at any of it, till it's done.

I'm reluctant to try to tell you anything in attempt to influence how you write it.
Simply because I don't possess any ability to construct ideas in story form. As you do.
But I will suggest one thing.
The portion of the screenplay you've completed is very clean. Not muddied up.
And by that I mean it's not overly matrixy. It has just enough of that quality and enough goes a long way. Don't stray from that by going off on too many tangents. That's not to suggest that you want to dumb it down. Because what you've written so far is plenty smart and has plenty of sophistication.
It just hasn't jumped the track into a hundred incomprehensible levels. Which I sense is looming in the recesses of your mind. While you may have no trouble sorting that out and neither would Larry Wachowski or David Lynch,
be mindful that us normal people might. We don't have quite the attention span of you three folks.

What I delineated above has always been the plan. It's complicated, I know. The only reason I even have a stupid, government investigation angle, is for exposition of all the more complex elements, but I'm not interested in spelling everything out more than once. I want the "audience" to have to piece everything together for themselves, and the purpose of an 8,000 year long mission will only be implied. The whole damn thing can be simplified if necessary, but I really like movies that don't underestimate the intelligence of the audience. God knows, they're few enough of them.

Yes there are.

I think this is why I was reluctant. Anything I say can be easily misinterpreted. So don't pay any attention to it. :)

Besides, I could be all wrong. As I now think about it, following Matrix there were several threads on here with many posts indicating that the very approach that I'm cautioning against may be what audiences (or readers as the case may be) are clamoring for. But it was hard to tell. Others were put off by it.

Todd: Please put the spoiler tag up there! Too many lurkers here who will love reading or watching it from the start. I like that idea though. I'm also not ignoring your PM, it just requires more than a snippet of time to respond to.

Originally posted by RobertWood
Yes there are.

I think this is why I was reluctant. Anything I say can be easily misinterpreted. So don't pay any attention to it. :)

Besides, I could be all wrong. As I now think about it, following Matrix there were several threads on here with many posts indicating that the very approach that I'm cautioning against may be what audiences (or readers as the case may be) are clamoring for. But it was hard to tell. Others were put off by it.

No Bob, I understand that it could end up being too clever by half, and if It does, I want you to tell me. Twists aren't absolutely necessary, but they do serve a purpose beyond the story itself.

Originally posted by moore
I'm also not ignoring your PM, it just requires more than a snippet of time to respond to.

Well that's a relief..........maybe :D



But everybody else is confused, and/or bored by all this, so let's get back to speculatin'.

Originally posted by rto
But everybody else is confused, and/or bored by all this, so let's get back to speculatin'. Yep, some folks are probably lost about now. This actually belongs in the thread Dean started: 'This Is A Stupid Idea, Probably'. (I'm not saying your idea is stupid) In other news, the commercial rocket thing is gettin' me excited. Looks like I may get to revive my childhood dream of orbiting the earth after all. Whoopee!

Afraid it's my fault, rezzy. rto's never once even brought it up as I recall.
I sometimes get carried away. Will try to turn over a new leaf. I'll straighten up and fly right. Get religion. Obey the rules.
It won't be easy. But I promise to really try harder.

But just one more thing about this Immortal.

On second thought, maybe I best not.
See, I can do better. It just takes some discipline is all.

DOLPHY: Whatcha think, Flipper? These humans sure think they're cute, don't they. One of them is making jokes about us being somebody's soup.
Another posting pornographic pics of me and the Mrs. And one of em even thinks that human astronomer had a "thing" for us. Frankly, Flipper, I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

FLIPPER: I know what you mean, Dolphy. They think they own this world.
It's humans this and humans that. They can be cute I guess. But boy does it give me the red arse when they keep dumping all their garbage in my back yard. Their sewage is bad enough. But they left a big boat in the bay during this last hurricane. After the hurricane sunk it now it's leaking out all that diesel fuel. I can't even take the wife and kids into the bay anymore. I'm afraid what that oily mess will do to their skin.

DOLPHY: I know. They're so inept. They're deathly afraid of hurricanes you know. A little water gets them so upset. Can you imagine that? They build all those shacks on the beach over there to have a place to be so the rain won't get on em. And then a hurricane comes, tears down the shacks and now they're living in a high school gymnasium. What a hoot.

FLIPPER: So silly isn't it. Man that hurricane was a blast? Best waves we've had around here since I can remember. I caught a ride on one of em that was so gnarly it carried me all the way down to Oriole Beach.

DOLPHY: Yea, it was a thrill ride allright. And it stirred up all that food from the bottom. Me and the family been dining like kings for two weeks.

FLIPPER: I see many of our porpoise buddies came in for this one too, Dolphy. Hope they enjoyed it as much as we did. We need to all get together for a swim. Bury the hatchet and stuff. But you know, I think it's now time we better think about moving farther out. Being near these beaches isn't safe anymore. What with all the crap those landlubbers keep dumping. Someday we're all gonna have to try to fit into the tank at Sea World. That'll be the only place left that's safe for us.

DOLPHY: Yea, I've heard of a spot down there below the Yucatan channel. No oil, no sewage, not much human interaction with it at all.
And big powerful hurricanes come through there often. The surfing must be awesome.

FLIPPER: Yea, we better get everybody together and get moving. That dead zone below us is getting bigger and bigger. They say no marine life of any kind can live in it. I don't want my family to have to swim through that on the trip down.

I hope some of y'all were watchin da news this morn. History's bein made. SpaceShipOne, a privately built spacecraft, just made it's second manned flight into space within one week, 100km/62.5 miles above earth. Whoooo... what a rush that ride must be!

http://www.tycho.dk/ezimagecatalogue/catalogue/variations/1996-250x250.jpg

Mach 3.5 - 2500 miles/hour baby!

Now safely back on earth @ 8:13AM PST, and probably $10 million richer for their trouble.

Pilots Brian Binnie and Michael Melvill become the first commercial aviators to earn their Astronaut wings from the FAA.

Originally posted by rezzy
Looks like I may get to revive my childhood dream of orbiting the earth after all. Whoopee!

I think you're right rezzy, but you'd better be prepared to pony up some serious buckage. :) BTW, how's your story coming ?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39172000/jpg/_39172961_cockpi150.jpg

Last week, Richard Branson, the British airline mogul and adventurer, announced that beginning in 2007, he will begin offering paying customers flights into space aboard rockets like the SpaceShipOne. He plans to call the service Virgin Galactic.Tickets will be a mere £100,000 ($200,000).

And you ride in front of the Nitrous Oxide Tank. :)

http://www.aviationnow.com/content/publication/awst/042103/images/ghostshipx.jpg

How long before dealers with names like "Rattlebrain" start peddling tickets on eBay for $20k?

Gus

I've been following that story with great interest, ADU. Burt Rutan has been a legend in the experimental aircraft world for a long time, but I didn't even think he had this in him. Very cool.

An amazing ride! I was surprised just how good the video was, considering how high these puppies went. The images were of course quite fuzzy and undetailed, but you could clearly see the separation of the two crafts, ignition of SpaceShipOne's rocket, and the coasting all the way to it's max altitude of 368,000 feet (69 miles/114 km), overshooting their target by ~14 km, and setting a new civilian manned altitude record.

It's great to see private enterprise finally getting into the space game in a serious way. I think I heard something about a new contest (from Pepsi?) to give away a ticket for one of these rides btw. So you never know...

Brain (and stomach) rattling is right btw, Gus! Although the craft didn't make any rolls like the last flight, it still did some pretty good rocking back and forth. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/images/icons/icon4.gif And I think the pilot was pulling about 3.5 Gs?

SpaceShipOne Flight Plan (http://www.space.com/images/040927_ss1_flight_02.jpg)

Originally posted by moore
I've been following that story with great interest, ADU. Burt Rutan has been a legend in the experimental aircraft world for a long time, but I didn't even think he had this in him. Very cool.

The design looks like Burt Rutan alright, his layouts always look kinda wierd to me even though they are extremely efficient and practical. The only thing I notice missing are the front canards he usually puts on.

Most of his work has been with prop craft though, and very aerodynamic, efficient designs (as you say). You may recall he designed the Voyager, which his brother flew along with Joanna(?) Yeager on the first round-the-world-with-no-refueling trip for an aircraft.

He (and all the people who worked on this) have gotta be pleased with themselves for space ship one. It's a great acheivement.


Edit: check out the default google page. Kinda funny, and relevant in more ways than one to this thread.

Originally posted by rto
I think you're right rezzy, but you'd better be prepared to pony up some serious buckage. :) BTW, how's your story coming ? They're coming along just fine, thanks. That's right, I'm working on a couple of projects simultaneously. The idea is to to get someone to bite and have them turned into films, thus funding my journey into space. BTW, I think your story is great, I just don't want to know too much right now. Lately I've boycotted a number of films just to make sure my ideas are my own and not someone else's, if you know what I mean.
Anyhoo, when I get a seat on VirginGalactic I have the flight already dubbed: 'WarpOne'. I predict my flight will be the first to break Warp speed. Um, ..come to think of it, how fast is Warp speed?

Originally posted by KOA in the '2.5 Years 232 pages and counting Thread'
I mentioned the amount of posts about The Time Machine in one of the Star Wars threads recently when everyone was complaining about too many Star Wars posts.

I still don't think Star Wars will catch up!Long Live The Time Machine!

Today is an important step. If you look at when rocketry first became a practical thing in the 10s/20's and folks like Goddard in the US and von Braun and his homies at the Rocketenfutzplag (sp?) in Germany, it wasn't more than 10 years probably before it hit the point of requiring the kind of money that only national treasuries or international consortia could support. And it went up quickly from there. But finally the cycle is coming back around to the day when it will become more common and safer (hopefully, though when you are releasing a lot of energy quickly the danger level can't be ignored.)

Did you delete your last post, b2b, or did the moderator feel it was inappropriate? Just curious is all.

It was just a weird news flash.. I had no intention of jacking the ongoing
conversation. I killed it.

b2b

just like this one ;)

Hmmm... interesting coincidence, Gordo Cooper, one of the original Mercury astronauts died today.

Originally posted by b2bonez
It was just a weird

Weird? Weird doesn't even begin to describe it. It rendered me speechless. It was by far the damndest thing I've ever read in all my 55 years. Nothing else even comes close. And it was Reuters so I imagine it was true.

I didn't get to see it! What did he say?

I have the link he posted. I'll PM it to you.

Well I thought I did. Put it in a notepad file. But accidentally closed it.
Please PM me and RVonse the link again, b2b. I want to email it to some friends.

I think there's more to the story than the version he told. Either that, or it's bogus. I mean, the guy is choking his chicken right, and...............the dog ate it ??!! Sounds like a homework excuse to me, I just ain't buyin it.

Huh??!...Um, nevermind...I don't even wanna' know. Straighten up now kiddies, get back on topic.

Wait a minute now. What I read was he was using a knife to clean some chickens. And then confused his own chicken with that and accidentally cut it off.
What did the dog do? I was so dumbstruck by it I think I musta missed that part.

Alright, now you have to post it again, bonez. Enquiring minds.

Found it.

http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=6406472

After reading it again, I'm still just as dumbstruck. But I now agree with Todd. I just can't see how that's even possible.

Wow. That definitely takes the cake. Utterly bizzare. He must have been holding the chicken down there somewhere and it was dark.......

edit: endless "choking the poultry" and "my dog ate my ___" jokes come to mind.

Sorry, rezzy. I said I wouldn't screw up and I did it again. I'm going to punish myself for it this time. I'm now in the process of figuring out what the appropriate punishment will be. And then I'll exact it on myself. Will probably ban myself from posting for 30 days. Or take away my iced tea for 30 days. Or maybe even both. I'm deliberating.

SpaceshipOne is an incredible achievement. I watched NBC Nightly News coverage of it last night. A young boy who was present at the landing was asked: "why are you interested in this?".
His response was: "they just went into space". "Who wouldn't be interested in it."
Attaboy.

Here's the amazing thing to me about SS1-- Space is no longer just for the few, the anointed, and the ones with "the right stuff". True, it's still only for the rich and/or extremely well-trained, but this step really gives hope that average everday Joes like you and me could eventually get up there too if we save up our sheckles. Space is no longer just for the "agencies" and "administrations", it can be for just regular old people too, like plummers, script writers, mathematicians, dolphin trainers, messengers and antique dealers. In 5 or 10 years, a brief cruise to outer space could run about the price of a nice Mercedes. What serious space-lover could resist? That is a real paradigm shift.

If Pepsi or Virgin (or Starkist) stepped up and paid your way, would you ride shotgun with Brian or Mike on this (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?g=events/sc/080904ansarixprize&a=&tmpl=sl&ns=&l=1&e=14&a=0&t=&prev=13)?

Separation (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?g=events/sc/080904ansarixprize&a=&tmpl=sl&e=15&l=0&ns=)
Astronaut Wings (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?g=events/sc/080904ansarixprize&a=&tmpl=sl&ns=&l=1&e=32&a=0&t=&prev=31)
Video (http://news.yahoo.com//p/v?u=/ap_av/20041004/av_ap_us/3f21f755abdc564dc568b20dfeb7a084&cid=448&f=53746353)

Actually, I have to admit, I am a big p___y and there's no way I'd get in that thing until it's had a solid safety record.

Even for a lifetime supply of pepsi, tuna, and pop music.

ditto

Alrighty then, but no tuna or astronaut wings for you. (Flipper and Dolphy are gonna be very disappointed.)

Yes, but we can feel secure in the knowledge that Earthlings have all the bases covered. Flipper and Dolphy are focusing their explorations in the opposite direction. I wouldn't be surprised if they've already explored the lost continent of Atlantis.

Originally posted by ADU
...Space is no longer just for the "agencies" and "administrations", it can be for just regular old people too, like plummers, script writers, mathematicians, dolphin trainers, messengers and antique dealers. Ha! That's hilarious. But true. Bob, no problemo. You get off with a light slap on the wrist this time. You may post and drink your tea, especially if you drink it unsweetened. And yes ADU, I would fly shotgun. In a heartbeat. I've never been a thrillseeker but I'd take that ride and all the tuna I could wash down with Pepsi. They can keep the pop music however.

Pepsi and Starkist should be relieved to hear that rezzy.Originally posted by RobertWood
Yes, but we can feel secure in the knowledge that Earthlings have all the bases covered. Flipper and Dolphy are focusing their explorations in the opposite direction. I wouldn't be surprised if they've already explored the lost continent of Atlantis. You mean visited home? (I thought it was common knowledge that Atlantians adapted to life underwater and eventually became what we now know as "dolphins"? Kinda surprised Flipper or Dolphy haven't clued you in on that yet.)

I was sure btw that "nasa buffalo wings" wouldn't bring anything up in Google. But I was wrong.

http://www.buffaloschools.org/science/images/NASA/wings.JPG

<insert caption here>

That's a teacher's workshop if I've ever seen one.

Mmm-hmm.

Come to think of it, I'd rather fly on spaceship one than have to teach grade school. Mad props to school teachers, but I would curl up and die if I had to do that job.

Ditto.

That picture looks like they are being taught about the principles of air density. Blow above the sheet of paper and lower the air pressure and it will lift up, not go down.

That was my guess as well. A demonstration of lift (though I was hoping for some more creative guesses)... which sort of brings us back to the design of SS1. Aside from the weird hinging wing design, another thing that was kind of interesting was the choice of Nitrous Oxide (laughing gas) as the propellant.

Spaceship 1 uses a solid fuel: hydroxy-terminated polybutadiene, ( an ingredient in car tires.) It's stable, non-toxic, non-volatile, and safe. nitrous oxide is used as the oxidizer. The engine is really a hybrid design, and is remarkably simple. The combustion process can be controlled, unlike the solid boosters on the shuttle, which simply burn their fuel in a predictable, but uncontrolled manner till all of it is exhausted.

So the "rubber" is the fuel, as opposed to the nitro. And by "hybrid", you mean an engine that uses separate materials, a solid (the polybutadiene) and a liquid/gas (nitro), n'est-ce pas?... which I guess is the key to controlling it since you can control the flow/mixture of nitro via a valve, rather than just igniting it and lettin it burn out.

One last question/comment and then I'll shut up and go away again. ;) It looks like they have to glide the craft in for a landing, so I'm guessin they can't control the thrust well enough to use for regular flying (and no room for another jet engine)?

Originally posted by ADU
So the "rubber" is the fuel, as opposed to the nitro. And by "hybrid", you mean an engine that uses separate materials, a solid (the polybutadiene) and a liquid/gas (nitro), n'est-ce pas?... which I guess is the key to controlling it since you can control the flow/mixture of nitro via a valve, rather than just igniting it and lettin it burn out.

One last question/comment and then I'll shut up and go away again. ;) It looks like they have to glide the craft in for a landing, so I'm guessin they can't control the thrust well enough to use for regular flying (and no room for another jet engine)?


Yes, the liquid oxidizer and solid fuel make it a hybrid design, capable of throttle control. This craft was designed to meet the requirements of a specific mission. Extra fuel and engines would add considerable mass, drag, and complexity to the design. Un-powered flight ( gliding ) uses no fuel, and is therefore more efficient. For goodness sake, don't shut up! :)

Be careful what you wish for, rto. :) OK, two more questions (and then I'll shut-up).

1) With a gliding design like this, I guess it isn't that important to have power for the landing, since there's ample velocity from the descent to get where you need to go. I wonder if a throttling rocket like this could be used to power horizontal flight as well though? (Can't really see why not.)

2) Branson is apparently wasting no time (http://www.virgingalactic.com/like.html) getting his space tourism act up and rolling. But when will VG have flights to the moon (Alice)?

It could be used to power horizontal flight. Rockets have been used before to power such craft. Germany had a rocket powered interceptor during WWII, and RATO ( rocket assisted take off ) pods have been used to supplement power and lift on aircraft to shorten takeoffs and lift heavy bomb loads. The problem with any rocket is that while they produce high thrust, they also burn fuel at a prodigious rate. That WWII interceptor had a flight endurance measured in minutes.

Orbital flights will be a order of magnitude beyond what was achieved this week, because you have to reach a much higher velocity; 17,500 mph, but I'm sure it will happen in the not-too-distant future. Trips to the moon ? I'm not sure anyone could pay a sufficiently high tariff to make tourism attractive enough for a company to make the investment to get there solely for that reason.

Originally posted by rto
Trips to the moon ? I'm not sure anyone could pay a sufficiently high tariff to make tourism attractive enough for a company to make the investment to get there solely for that reason.

Well, if not the Moon, then maybe the MS Phloston Paradise.

http://members.cox.net/buddy_weiser/MS.JPG

:D Ain't it the truth! Bill will probably still be around, having been thawed out of cryogenic suspension, or pickled with all the medical preservative measures his billions can buy.

Originally posted by rto

Orbital flights will be a order of magnitude beyond what was achieved this week, because you have to reach a much higher velocity; 17,500 mph, but I'm sure it will happen in the not-too-distant future.

So then what is the significance of what the SS-1 achieved?

I thought they had gone into space which is where the satellites are cavorting around.

You mean this is not the same space where the space shuttle goes?

I thought they (the media) had said they (the pilot) had experience weightlessmess. I would assume that if the pilot is weightless, then so is the ship. And that is the ship is weighless, it can just keep on cruising into space without any more pre-requisites (such as achieving 17,500 mph)

Please set me straight on this.

Gus

Originally posted by Gus
...I thought they (the media) had said they (the pilot) had experience weightlessmess. I would assume that if the pilot is weightless, then so is the ship. And that is the ship is weighless, it can just keep on cruising into space without any more pre-requisites (such as achieving 17,500 mph)...

You can achieve weightlessness without acheiving orbit, no problem. The two aren't related.

For example if you go down a roller-coaster in free-fall, you experience weightlessness (or close to it, depending on the roller coaster).

If you plumment in an airplane in free-fall you will experiance weightlessness.

Essentially they did a very big version of free fall. Once they shut off their rockets from shooting them straight up, they were weightless as the only effect on them was gravity, with nothing to counter it. That's weightlessness.

P.S. I think this flight plan (originally posted by ADU) says it all:

http://www.space.com/images/040927_ss1_flight_02.jpg

Originally posted by rto
:D Ain't it the truth! Bill will probably still be around, having been thawed out of cryogenic suspension, or pickled with all the medical preservative measures his billions can buy.

Maybe he can play catch with Ted Williams' head! :D

Gus, if you were on an elevator, and someone cut the cable, you and everything in the elevator would be in free fall. If you held a ball out from your body and let go, it would hang in the air next to you, relatively motionless. Astronauts in orbit are also in free fall. The force of gravity at that point is precisely "balanced" by their velocity, so they don't fall back to the Earth, but around it. Imagine twirling a small bucket of water on a rope around your body. As you spin more quickly, the bucket moves ever higher until it's at an almost horizontal position. The rope is the "gravity" which keeps the bucket from flying away. If the bucket slows down in it's "orbit" around you, it will come ever closer to your body.

The gravity well of the Earth does not fall away immediately as you enter space, but very gradually. Imagine a giant, smoothly curved funnel with it's small end on the ground, and it's wide, flared opening a great distance out in space. This is an approximation of how Earth's gravity well works; very, very steep at the bottom, and gradually less so, the further up the funnel you go. When the shuttle wants to de-orbit, it simply slows down, going ever lower as it slows, until friction with molecules in the atmosphere really make it slow down.

I like the analogy of a huge flat, black sheet of flexible rubber. Now place heavy balls on it. What happens to the sheet of rubber ? The balls will distort the sheet, sinking down into it, creating large dimples; very shallow and gently sloped at some distance, but very steep, the closer you come to the ball. ( The sheet represents space-time, and the balls represent planets ) If you were to roll a much smaller ball near one of the large, heavy balls, it's path would be altered as it encountered the distorted area in the rubber. If it was moving very quickly, it would likely start down into the dimple, but continue out on the other side. If it was moving more slowly, it might be "captured" by one of the dimples, winding it's way around in an initially lazy, but ever quickening spiral until it struck the ball at the center. If it were possible to remove friction from the equation, you could keep a small ball "orbiting" around one of the larger ones indefinitely. This is another example of the relationship between gravity and velocity, and a fairly good analogy of what gravity does to the fabric of space-time.
Gus, if you're not snoring, I hope this helped.

Orbital flights are way more complex for several reasons:
higher velocity required to reach orbit
much more stringent design criteria for the craft to withstand "cold soak" in orbit for a long duration
attendant life support requirements for long duration flight
additional fuel and engines required for orbital maneuvers and deorbit burn
heat shield requirments to reenter the atmosphere from orbital velocities
SpaceShipOne is an impressive achievement, but everyone needs to know that it's not capable of anything close to what the Space Shuttle or even a Soyuz can do.

Thanks for the explanations guys, but I guess what is confusing me isn't how gravity interacts with objects, but rather why is SS1's flight so important. It sounds like all they did was fly really high, but no different than an airplane (except for the fact that normal airplanes don't fly that high.)

I thought the effect of weightlessness they were discussing was due to having escaped the earth's pull. I guess I haven't really been paying too much attention to what they actually achieved

There is nothing (practical) the SS-1 can do that a 747 can't do.


How am I wrong? ( and I suspect that I am!)

The achievement is more symbolic than practical, but a 747 can't fly 10 miles high, much less 60. What spaceship 1 accomplished is a very important first step, analogous to Alan Shepard's suborbital flight. The next leap is a manned orbital flight, and as Sean pointed out, that's a far more difficult hurdle to cross. However, now that a relatively small, independent entity has shown the way, someone will follow their lead, because there is a great deal of money to be made in LEO and above, and little motivates folks more effectively than greed. :)

The other acheivement was that NASA wasn't involved, and it was nearly 'red-tape' free (except for the FAA). I once saw an airplane kit that excited me. Forget that now, I'm leap-froggin' to a spaceship kit instead. And I'm naming her, you guessed it; WarpOne. Strap on an IMAX camera and I'm in nirvana.

And they achieved it at less than 30 million dollars, plus got a 10 million dollar prize by doing it first. To me, accomplishing the design, build, and execution of a 3 person payload, two trips within one week, 100+ Km flight, at such a low cost is truly an achievement. Think how much NASA or Boeing would have (or did) spent to achieve the same.

Building these craft for under 200K would be the crowning acheivement for myself. But reality says it will be a while before that's possible.

Gentlemen (and ladies), you've said you needed evidence. I present you with the evidence. You've never seen a hubcap which looks like that.

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/timages/page/Brazilskeleton1a.jpg

Sorry, Bob. Looks suspiciously like a deformed HUMAN skeleton to me.

Gus

Yes, it looks almost like it could be a baby that got wacked right down the middle of its head with an ax.

Originally posted by Gus
Sorry, Bob. Looks suspiciously like a deformed HUMAN skeleton to me.

Gus Deformed human head with a turkey-bone body.

Oh well. The search continues. The truth is out there.

Don't give up hope Bob. If someone can design a beautiful piece of engineering like this (http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk/~apod/apod/image/0306/ssone_scaled_c1topcarry.jpg) which morphs from an airplane into a rocket, into a re-entry capsule, into a glider-lander, then almost anything could be possible.


I'm sure turkey-boy would agree.

I feel like Mulder in a room full of Scullys.
But I will have to admit. That is a cool machine.

Mark my words; NASA's not gonna' take this lying down. They'll have a commerial division to compete with VirginGalactic within 5 years.

I've always been fond of Swiss cheese.

http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk/~apod/apod/image/0306/ssone_scaled_c1topcarry.jpg

Originally posted by rezzy
Mark my words; NASA's not gonna' take this lying down. They'll have a commercial division to compete with VirginGalactic within 5 years.
They have an "uphill" battle... Virgin Galactic has a spotless operating record, while their competition has been marred by years of careless passenger deaths. Which carrier would you choose? When you're planning that ultimate get-away, why take unnecessary risks with your life when you can float with the leader in safety.





This message brought to you by Virgin Galactic. Statistics based on public records from the last 40 years. YMMV. See dealer for details. Void in Rhode Island. Passengers must sign a waiver and pass a physiological evaluation. No humans were harmed in the filming of this production... A few birds were hit during takeoffs though. Sorry.

;) :D

Originally posted by Man E
They have an "uphill" battle... Virgin Galactic has a spotless operating record, while their competition has been marred by years of careless passenger deaths. Which carrier would you choose? When you're planning that ultimate get-away, why take unnecessary risks with your life when you can float with the leader in safety.
You make an excellent point, but Virgin has only made what, 3 flights to date? Like any other venture, there will likely be a number of competitors until they begin swallowing each other up. When the smoke clears, NASA could be the last rocket standing.

;)

http://zine.d-structure.com/zine/inline/articles/20030624-TDF_2003/full/Day5/RE-Fish-Hook.jpg

I've always been fond of Swiss cheese.Me too actually (maybe I'm part Swiss... or part mousse). This is what came to mind in my head when you said that though: http://petcaretips.net/IGotARock.jpg

Wow! I haven't seen that one in years! "I got a rock!" :)

Betty Hill, 85, Figure in Alien Abduction Case, Dies

"The incident, the Hills said, occurred on the night of Sept. 19, 1961. Driving in the White Mountains of New Hampshire, they saw a light that seemed to grow larger and larger. Back home, they found what appeared to be shiny spots on the car's exterior. They could not account for a two-hour segment of their trip.

The Hills later saw a psychiatrist, who put them under hypnosis. Gradually, a narrative of the couple's lost hours emerged. They recounted many times that a group of short gray-skinned beings stopped their car and took them aboard a waiting spaceship. There, the Hills said, they were subjected to rigorous medical examinations that included inserting a long needle into Mrs. Hill's navel."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/23/national/23hill.html

b2b

She dies this close to the election and I bet you think that's just a coincidence don't you.

Bob, do you remember what time travel did to the election in Bradbury's 'Distant Thunder'?

I'm ashamed to say, rezzy, that since "Distant Thunder" was a book.... well you know. ;)

What did happen?

Yeah, that was way back when I used to read. I don't wanna' give it away, so check your PMs in a few minutes. That being said, all time-travel is banned until after Nov. 2nd.

I've always been fond of Swiss cheese.


I thought the quote was "I've always been fondue of Swiss cheese".

Regarding the time travel and the election, according to time traveler John Titor, it doesn't matter. Soon after the election, the 2nd American Civil War begins for 10 years. Then nukes fall in 2015.

The Time Travel Tale of John Titor (www.johntitor.com)

As far as war goes, I have faith you are quite capable of starting one all by yourself. I am hard pressed to accept any criticism on my outlook on that subject. Growing up might have been a vastly different experience for me than it was for most of you. Personal responsibility, determination, honor, friendship and self-reliance are not just words we try to live up to or fantasize about.

On my worldline, life is not easy. We live in a world recovering from years of war, poison, destruction and hate. All of it, courtesy of the thinking and actions of people that live right now in the same world you do, worrying about which stocks to buy or whether or not a stranger is lying to them on the Internet.

Revealing Titan's Surface (http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA06125)
Titan Close-Ups (http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gs2.cgi?path=../multimedia/images/titan/images/PIA06138.jpg&type=image)
Titan in False Color (http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gs2.cgi?path=../multimedia/images/titan/images/PIA06139.jpg&type=image)

In the spirit of Orson Welles, I hope that you all had a happy Halloween. Yes, it was a silly hoax for Halloween night, and I made it all up by conglomerating a bunch of conspiracy theory silliness from the web.

You had me going good. But then you pushed the envelope just a little too far with that last post and threw in the Hollywoodish sounding stuff. :D

Check this;

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/space/livinginspace/chiao_votes.html

Pretty fascinating, but blast him, I wanted the distinction of being the first person
to ever do this!

This is off topic. I didn't know any other way to ask this question except in this thread. But I'm really hoping that someone can help with this.

Night before last I listened to an interview on amcoastocoast. The guest
was convinced beyond any doubt that microwave radiation from cell phones and cell phone towers is producing health problems on a very large scale. And the industry has covered this up.
I use a cell phone as my primary phone averaging 4000 minutes a month. So if there's anything to this it concerns me greatly.
There was so much information in the course of this two hour interview that it would be impossible to relate it all. But it was said that there are now medical doctors who are saying that cell phone use should be limited to 5 minutes per month because of the dangers. That headsets don't shield us from the effects of radiation because it's been shown that the cord actually acts as an antenna which channels concentrated radiation to the user's ear. That the effects are felt when the microwaves break down the "blood brain barrier" which permits blood toxins to enter brain tissue. That children are the most susceptible since this blood barrier membrane is even more fragile in children. That the radiation is causing tumors, short term memory loss, headaches, lethargy and on and on.
He went on to say how the industry has covered this up. Their studies have been limited only to looking for how the radiation effects temperature changes in the body. And have not found significant temperature changes.
But he says that is worthless. That the harmful effects go far beyond anything that would result in temperature changes. And he claims that there are scientific studies independent of those conducted by the industry which are now confirming this.
And he said the same effects are produced by 2.4 Mz and higher frequency cordless phones.

I don't think I can relate to you how scary this presentation was to anyone listening to it. But you could hear the concern in the voices of the callers to the program as the interview progressed.

Can anyone shed any light on all this?

Here's some one stop shopping for you Bob:

http://www.fda.gov/cellphones/qa.html

The jist of it is that you are in far, far greater danger, as established by mountains of epidemiology, from your smoking than any cell or wireless phone use. There's nothing in this to cover up. People work routinely exposed to higher levels of radiofrequency power at these wavelengths and suffer no ill effects.

If you're really worried about your health, stop smoking. I don't mean to preach but that will do more to help you than wearing a steel helmet and jock while using your phone.

By the way:


http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/105768main_pia07232-516.jpg

Thanks, m. Both for the info and the warning. I'm battling that one as we speak.
Take a look at these and tell me what you think.
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news/cell_phone_cancer_link.htm

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/4/30/121604.shtml

http://www.mercola.com/2001/jun/27/mobile_phones.htm

p.s. That is one awesome photo. You must have been reading my mind. I actually had the url copied and was going to post it and then the site was hit by the outage.
The most amazing thing to me is the shoreline seen in the photo taken on the way down. Aren't they speculating that it might be a sea of methane?

Aren't they speculating that it might be a sea of methane?


That would be awfully smelly, at least for the 2 seconds before your nostrils froze solid.

http://tuberose.com/Graphics/cookhead.gif

Actually, methane has no smell. Natural gas, which is mostly methane, has some compounds which smell very bad added to it so that people won't let their houses or high school chem labs fill up with gas and explode.

Bob - this is another even better link:
http://cis.nci.nih.gov/fact/3_72.htm

As for what I think of your links, well, there is a lot of noise on the internet. Further, health impacts are notoriously difficult to study, since care has to be taken to account for other factors that could influence the outcome. Back in 1999, I might be persuaded that somethin' was up. Now, there have been so many studies which found zip (see the NCI link above) that I'm unconvinced. I think this will eventually fade into obscurity, like cancer from sacharrine. Remember that? People are still mad that Tab came off the market. And yes, sacharrine does cause cancer in lab rats. Just not people.

On the other hand, there are real issues like radon that I haven't heard about in years....you don't have a basement do you?

Good article (http://www.globalchange.com/radiation.htm) On the same site is the "The Truth about the War with Iraq". No comments...Please

>> The greatest risk to a mobile phone user is from an accident while distracted - particularly when driving. This risk is likely to be many tens of thousands of times greater than a radiation hazard.
Evidence from human studies of mobile phone radiation is now of raised blood pressure, direct brain warming (very mild) as well as of mild sensations in heavy users. These effects are short term and unlikely to cause any health problems in the vast majority of users even over many years.
There is no evidence so far of mobile phone radiation causing tumour formation or memory impairment in humans - may be memory enhancing. Much more research needed.
Mice, rats and chickens may be more sensitive to electromagnetic effects from mobile phones on their cells. So results on animals may not be valid for humans. We just don't know.
Further human studies of mobile phone health risks are urgently needed, because of the very large numbers using mobiles.
Whatever effects of using mobile phones there may be in humans, the health risk to an individual user from electromagnetic radiation is likely to be very, very small indeed, but it is possible that some individuals may be more prone to radiation side effects than others.
Expect large numbers of people to come forward with claims that a wide variety of conditions have been triggered or made worse by use of mobile phones. These claims will be extremely difficult to prove. Even if a link is shown, proving that a particular case was directly related to heavy mobile phone use is almost impossible. This has been the case, for example, over Gulf War syndrome, or reactions to MMR vaccine, or the debates over passive smoking, or clustering of leukaemia cases near power stations.
If the case against mobiles were to become established in people's minds, expect many lawsuits alleging that other sources of electromagnetic radiation have also damaged health or caused birth defects - for example electricity sub-stations, computers, generators, minicab aerials.
Some manufacturers already sell radiation shields for mobiles, reducing electromagnetic radiation to the head. Many or most of these seem to be based on very doubtful claims.
Moving the mobile phone aerial eight inches from the head, instead of one inch, would dramatically reduce exposure - dose falls to 1/64th as the square of the distance.
Good quality, screened hands free mobile phone kits, allowing earpiece and microphone attached to phone in pocket, massively reduce brain exposure to electromagnetic radiation, but may increase exposure to the pelvis and the unborn - again with significance unknown!

Thanks, m, Dean and DOBE all. I'm starting to see red about being conned by that crap on that radio show. It's gotten to be nothing but doomsayers and paranoia night after night. Something needs to be done about it.
Somebody needs to take Bell and Noory and that whole outfit down a notch.

You could stop listening.

No way. It's too much fun. :D

You want to get a belly laugh? That crackpot Richard Hoagland was on the show and at it again. He's now saying the Rover took a pic that showed a "fossil" and when NASA saw it they quickly had the Rover grind it up to cover up the evidence.
Check it out. Pictures and all.

http://www.enterprisemission.com/_articles/03-08-2004/crinoid_cover-up.htm

When Hoagland is spewing this stuff to the radio audience, what's really so sad is to hear Noory, the show host, acting like his cheerleader.
What I'd like to know is where in the hell is CSICOP during all this. By now they should have launched an all out campaign to debunk coasttocoastam altogether.
I mean this thing is on hundreds of radio stations every night with this hogwash.

To answer my own question, it looks like the last time they wrote anything goes all the way back to 1998.
http://www.csicop.org/sb/9803/art-bell.html

I guess they must have just thrown in the towel after that.

But at least he did start that article with a damn funny line. :D

Living in Los Angeles, I've grown accustomed to seeing neon-signed psychic storefronts, sidewalk fortunetellers, aura readers, channelers, spiritualists, and New Age advocates of all kinds. The "fringe" is well represented here.

But none of this -- not even the psychic cat that occasionally shows up on Venice Beach -- could have prepared me for the bizarre parade of paranormal oddities appearing regularly on the late-night radio program "The Art Bell Show."

Was Hoaglund the guy who ran for Prez a few years back under the "natural law" party, who wanted to eminate peace fields or some such?

Anyway, that site reminded me of this:
http://snltranscripts.jt.org/79/79aupdate.phtml

Find the popes in the pizza....

I don't know if he ran for President. But I wouldn't doubt it, his kind usually do.

However, Hoagland's fifteen minutes is due primarily to his discovery of "life on Mars". He'll even point to it if you give him a banana.

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2004/TECH/space/03/17/alien.debunk/story.hoagland.face.cnn.jpg

My bad. I was thinking of this dude, similar name but different flavor of nut:

http://hagelin.org/

I think Hoaglund would've won Father Guido Sarducci's contest. He might have even made $25,000 selling a grilled cheese sandwich.

That the radiation is causing tumors, short term memory loss, headaches, lethargy and on and on. It all makes sense now. On the weekends when my work cell phone is off and I use a regular phone, I am fine, happy, no headaches, remember things, and full of energy. Then, Monday morning I go to work, turn on my work cell phone, and I get sick, frustrated, headaches, forget things, and lethargic. Yes, of course, it's that cell phone my evil employer forces me to use...

Or, maybe I hate my job ;)

Holy fudge, look what was on that site I linked:

http://hagelin.org/news/denmark.html

WTF? Lynch?

Regardless of what the studies on cell phones indicate thus far, the truth is that the frequencies that are being emitted, right next to your ear, are the same ones that you cook food with, in your microwave oven (granted it is at a much lower power, measured in milli-watts instead of Kilo-watts).

Nevertheless, I feel better about the whole thing just by using a hands-free device. The amount energy you get (from a non-directional antenna) drops off as the square of the distance. Just putting the phone even a few inches away from your head drops RF levels considerably.

And that malarky about the RF traveling up the cord to your ear via the hands free is nonsense. The FCC has strict regulations regarding that sort of emission. (Not to mention the fact that it's just way too easy to filter the RF from an audio signal and not doing so wastes a lot of energy that a portable phone with a tiny little battery cannot afford to waste).

One other point: Modern digital phones are a big improvement over the older analog (AMPS) phones in this regard. They transmit with the minimum amount of signal needed to do the job and so tend to transmit a lot less power overall.

Originally posted by moore
http://www.fda.gov/cellphones/qa.html



Ah, piece of mind. Of course you can take governmental studies to the bank, because the government has never been known to deceive or exaggerate about anything. ;)

From that link:

‘At the present time, most of the non-military research on biological effects of RF energy in the U.S. is being funded by industry organizations.”

And of course you can always depend on people in the industry telling you the truth, just like R.J. Reynolds and the tobacco industry being truthful about their studies on smoking.

Originally posted by RobertWood


http://www.mercola.com/2001/jun/27/mobile_phones.htm



"The patents show that the manufacturers have been working on radiation-reducing components for at least eight years. The companies maintain that there is no contradiction between their public stance and the existence of the patents."

Hmmmm.......


A more current study released last month:

http://http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/ptech/12/21/tech.mobilephone.health.reut/[/URL]

A humorous take on it:

http://http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000577024348/ [URL]

At the current time there is no conclusive proof of cancer, but for anyone to say the concern is all ******** is being just as idiotic as someone saying it is a fact. I personally think using that device for 4000 minutes a month is way too much (and why not use a land-line for the majority of your calls?) and you never know what the future may hold. Try using a headphone. Obviously I’m no scientist and I believe in UFO’s, so take that for what its worth.

Sadly, so do I. :D

Originally posted by Workindood
Robert, I totally agree with ya. It can be wack-0 stuff on that show. But it IS entertaining. I have a POV that not everything is total BS. There has to be some truth. Not everyone is 100% right or wrong either. So I try to shift through the BS and see what the truth is.

I don't disagree, Dood. I listen to a lot of it and there is some good stuff intermixed with the insanity. And it is always entertaining.

But case in point. If you're more than just a casual listener, you know that for most of last year a recurring topic on the show was this this notion that a
huge asteroid, a comet, a planet X or some such thing was to crash into the west coast last October. Week after week an endless parade of seers and psychics had the audience half scared out of it's wits that the end was coming. And old Geroge Nerdy and Art Bunky were there to egg the whole thing on.
But don't you find it interesting that since October ended we never hear Nerdy or Bunky say a word about it anymore. It's as if they've completely forgotten that it had all but taken over the show before October (boy, those cell phones must have really destroyed their memories).
And don't you find it interesting that you don't hear audience members calling
in to say words to this effect: "Hey Art, since it's now obvious to all of us that the whole planet x malarkey was a load of bullcrap, why should we believe any of this new nonsense your guests are babbling about?"
Seems like the most appropriate question to me. But nobody ever asks it.

Art is a moody guy, sometimes his voice is laced with scepticism and sarcasm and disbelief.

But usually he supports and eggs on all the hair-brained theories, for entertainment purposes. Its all so transparent. If listeners believe that crap, isnt it the listener's fault?

By the way, any Phil Hendrie fans here? This guy takes fake radio to a whole nother level:

http://www.philhendrieshow.com/archive/show.html

Hes funny as heck :)

You're correct, John. Bell is the reason the show ever got an audience to start with.
He's a very talented broadcaster with a very distinctive style. It's unfortunate his health problems led to his needing Noory to replace him. Noory is a hack.

I was listening the night Bell had the guy on who made that "9/11 was staged" video that if you recall was the subject of a past thread here. Bell listened to this guy babble on for most of an hour. And at that point he abruptly said to his audience "Frankly, I've heard enough of this nonsense". And then just up and dumped the moron off the air. The guest had been scheduled for three hours and even though Bell had nothing to replace him with, to his credit he made the right decision.

As far as "isn't it the listener's fault?" Yes, often it's so apocryphal sounding
that I will agree with you. Any listener who buys into it would have to be
pretty lame. But at other times that's definitely not the case. And the cell phone show was an example. That guest gave every vibe to the audience that he knew what he was talking about. There was no reason for anyone to suspect that everything he was saying was not based on legitimate research. He had what seemed to be all the "facts and figures" to support every claim he made.
Nuts don't always come off sounding like nuts.

Originally posted by JohnR_IN_LA
any Phil Hendrie fans here?Bobbie Dooley is my idol, John. She sounds alot like my mother.

Hah Bobbie Dooley of the Western Estates Homeowners Association, shes my favorite too. One time she was writing bylaws to have wheelchair ramps removed from the front of disabled peoples homes.
When told about the plight about the nieghborhood fireman who had a back injured while rescuing a baby, she suggested that the fireman should have used the kid to break his fall.

Then theres the guy who was opening up a chain of free mammagram clinics...

he has about 3 interviewees like that a night, hah.

Talk about yer nuts sounding like nuts...

When I'm in LA I listen to him. At first I couldn't figure out what was going on. Then I caught on and was amazed at the guys talent. I guess most of those listening on KFI must be in on the joke. Now that he's syndicated it seems like most people who get outraged..at his "guests"...are from other parts of the country.

Could be the callers are plants or maybe everyone...including the callers are Hendrie. I like it when his GM is on and they fight with each other.

I second Phil Hendrie.

For those who don't know. He does all the voices himself, but he does a great job at it so that the casual or first time listener doesn't realize this. His 'guests' (which are him in disguise) will usually represent some outrageous position that often starts out somewhat reasonable and then continues to become more and more ridiculous.

Phil Hendrie lives for those times when some listener calls in outraged by the position being taken by the 'guest'. Of course, Phil is always on the side of the caller and against the 'guest'.

I think by creating these characters of his, he is able to say things he wouldn't otherwise be allowed to say (about racism, sexual harrassment, politics etc.)



:D

Originally posted by Aliens
...why not use a land-line for the majority of your calls?...

Problem with that is, these days most people's home phones are: CORDLESS

Same issue. Actually even worse because these tend to be frequency hopping and so put out high energy bursts at a single frequency that moves around, they also usually put out more power than a cell phone and most do not adjust their output level down from the maximum as digital cell phones do. Lastly, most people don't have a hands-free they can use with their cordless home phone.

I just glanced at the website. I don't see anything which would indicate syndication. Is the Phil Hendrie Show heard only in southern California?

MANY AFFILIATES (http://www.philhendrieshow.com/wheresphil.html) Here's your neck of the woods. No wonder so many callers are fooled.;)

FLORIDA:

FORT MYERS-NAPLES - WPTK 1200 AM - Ft. Myers, FL

TAMPA-ST. PETERSBURG-SARASOTA - WFLA 970 AM - Tampa, FL

MIAMI-FT. LAUDERDALE - WIOD 610 AM - Miami, FL

WEST PALM BEACH-FT. PIERCE - WJNO 1290 AM - Boynton Beach, FL

ORLANDO-DAYTONA BEACH-MELBOURNE - WTKS 104.1 FM - Cocoa Beach, FL

TALLAHASSEE - WNLS-AM 1270 Tallahassee, FL LIVE

VERO BEACH, FL - WWTB 1490 AM, Ft. Pierce-Vero Beach LIVE

I didn't know he had so many affiliates.

Thanks, DOBE. I'll try to take a listen.