One Step Closer......
-
@Dominica said:
I love that she mentions the Cornell food study in this article. One of Scott and my first dates was attending a talk at Cornell given by a professor there who was working with NASA to figure out what would be the best foods to take on a Mars mission...
Mars bars?
-
@g.jacobse It's okay, hun. Our teachers lied to all of us, it's not you, it's the American education system.
-
@Dominica said:
@g.jacobse said:
Think of Christopher Columbus and discovery of the New World.. Where would we Americans be had he not ventured into the unknown and the dangerous waters of monsters and myth.
You did NOT just go there with Christopher Columbus. SMH, didn't you read the Christopher Columbus thread from the other day? Check out the real story.
Read - I find it interesting.. It of course was not taught that way 30 years ago when I went through school..
I do realize that many of the 'good intended explorers' really did nothing but plunder, pillage and other foul and unpleasant things,... all in the name of Progress
One wonders if we will again turn a blind eye ( or just poke the eye out completely) when we meet those beyond the stars...
Fear and greed -
-
@g.jacobse we weren't taught it either. It has been coming to light more and more how much the American education system has been hiding things. "Lies My Teacher Told Me" is a great book that talks about the larger issue written by a professor who won a landmark court case because his textbook was denied use in a southern curriculum because it was "too accurate." He won in court that telling the truth could not be grounds for not choosing material for students.
His book points out that all college professors hope that their incoming students took as much coursework in high school as possible - except history students because the more history that they were taught in high school the more they would have to unlearn because high school curriculum are so universally falsified that the value of education there is actually a negative.
-
@Dominica said:
I love that she mentions the Cornell food study in this article. One of Scott and my first dates was attending a talk at Cornell given by a professor there who was working with NASA to figure out what would be the best foods to take on a Mars mission, and he talked about the "food fatigue" that the commander mentions. NASA, Cornell, and Disney's hydroponic labs at Epcot have been working on this for years.
I'm impressed that they chose a 34 year old to be the commander of the mission, because that is a high position, but I would imagine that they are thinking towards the future, and you simply HAVE to have young men and women on this mission due to the amount of time.
If you've never been on that tour at EPCOT, it's a really neat sight. I went earlier this year.
-
@Bill-Kindle said:
If you've never been on that tour at EPCOT, it's a really neat sight. I went earlier this year.
The boat tour is great but the walking tour is even better. I've done the tour easily half a dozen times since I first did it in 1998. It's my favourite thing in Disney World. We've taken the tour given by researchers and even the PhD who headed the entire facility personally (he was so excited to show off their research, it was awesome.)
That tour inspired me to build a collection of all of the major academic texts on hydroponic crop production. I've read about it extensively, more than most ag majors would ever see, even at graduate level.
-
@coliver said:
@ajstringham said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@ajstringham said:
Still, Mars is uninhabitable. Why do we care to set foot on there?
Um, to start a colony. The only reason they've ever talked about going there.
Yeah, but as I said, right now it's not livable. It was designed to be lived on by humans.
I don't think I follow this sentence? What was designed for humans?
I think the biggest reason of going to Mars is that we can develop technologies to better harness the resources that are available on other celestial bodies.
My biggest thing right now is why are we so focused on getting to Mars when we haven't made a livable colony on the moon? It would be the safer bet and a logical stepping stone to getting to Mars. It would also be a proving ground for said technologies, especially with the resources that are readily available on the moon for us to exploit (Helium3?)
snicker the Nazi's are already there...wait...that might be a movie, not a documentary...lol
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Bill-Kindle said:
If you've never been on that tour at EPCOT, it's a really neat sight. I went earlier this year.
The boat tour is great but the walking tour is even better. I've done the tour easily half a dozen times since I first did it in 1998. It's my favourite thing in Disney World. We've taken the tour given by researchers and even the PhD who headed the entire facility personally (he was so excited to show off their research, it was awesome.)
That tour inspired me to build a collection of all of the major academic texts on hydroponic crop production. I've read about it extensively, more than most ag majors would ever see, even at graduate level.
Done both same day. Did the walking tour last year.
-
@Bill-Kindle so much fun and so educational!
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@g.jacobse said:
Think of Christopher Columbus and discovery of the New World.. Where would we Americans be had he not ventured into the unknown and the dangerous waters of monsters and myth.
We'd be living in Europe without the weight of the guilt of exploration through genocide
Well, I don't like Europe and I have no weight of guilt over some genocide that happened 400 years ago.
-
@g.jacobse said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Yeah, it was absolutely crazy and terrifying.
Which is why (at least I think) the phrase "Flying by the seat of your pants" was coined....
Long / Deep space exploration is impractical because of the amount of fuel, water and Oxygen that would need to be bottled and hauled with. You'd have to build a Bio-sphere type system.. a 'Mini Earth'
But I'm no rocket scientist..
...not to mention the real distances you're talking about. Our movies today have our minds so misguided in terms of what deep space is really like. All of these Star Trek images of hopping around different galaxies is absolutely ridiculous. The Milky Way is about 100,000 light years across, and we're about 26,000 light years from the edge. That means that you could travel at light speed for 25,000 years and not reach the edge. Our recorded history is roughly 6,000 years. It would take almost 5 times that at light-speed travel just to get to the closest exit from our galaxy (of course, that's edge-on)! So, unless we can figure out how to go thousands of times faster than light speed, or learn how to create wormholes (which, of course are only theoretical to begin with) with known locations on either end, the whole ball of wax is kind of absurd. But don't let facts and logic throw you off course.
-
@art_of_shred said:
@g.jacobse said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Yeah, it was absolutely crazy and terrifying.
Which is why (at least I think) the phrase "Flying by the seat of your pants" was coined....
Long / Deep space exploration is impractical because of the amount of fuel, water and Oxygen that would need to be bottled and hauled with. You'd have to build a Bio-sphere type system.. a 'Mini Earth'
But I'm no rocket scientist..
...not to mention the real distances you're talking about. Our movies today have our minds so misguided in terms of what deep space is really like. All of these Star Trek images of hopping around different galaxies is absolutely ridiculous. The Milky Way is about 100,000 light years across, and we're about 26,000 light years from the edge. That means that you could travel at light speed for 25,000 years and not reach the edge. Our recorded history is roughly 6,000 years. It would take almost 5 times that at light-speed travel just to get to the closest exit from our galaxy (of course, that's edge-on)! So, unless we can figure out how to go thousands of times faster than light speed, or learn how to create wormholes (which, of course are only theoretical to begin with) with known locations on either end, the whole ball of wax is kind of absurd. But don't let facts and logic throw you off course.
....and yet there are those people who think they can build the Starship Enterprise....granted without warp drive...
-
@art_of_shred said:
@g.jacobse said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Yeah, it was absolutely crazy and terrifying.
Which is why (at least I think) the phrase "Flying by the seat of your pants" was coined....
Long / Deep space exploration is impractical because of the amount of fuel, water and Oxygen that would need to be bottled and hauled with. You'd have to build a Bio-sphere type system.. a 'Mini Earth'
But I'm no rocket scientist..
...not to mention the real distances you're talking about. Our movies today have our minds so misguided in terms of what deep space is really like. All of these Star Trek images of hopping around different galaxies is absolutely ridiculous. The Milky Way is about 100,000 light years across, and we're about 26,000 light years from the edge. That means that you could travel at light speed for 25,000 years and not reach the edge. Our recorded history is roughly 6,000 years. It would take almost 5 times that at light-speed travel just to get to the closest exit from our galaxy (of course, that's edge-on)! So, unless we can figure out how to go thousands of times faster than light speed, or learn how to create wormholes (which, of course are only theoretical to begin with) with known locations on either end, the whole ball of wax is kind of absurd. But don't let facts and logic throw you off course.
Manned flight was ridiculous back before December 17, 1903 too
What makes something seem ridiculous to our knowledge now could in fact become reality in the future. -
@Bill-Kindle said:
@art_of_shred said:
@g.jacobse said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Yeah, it was absolutely crazy and terrifying.
Which is why (at least I think) the phrase "Flying by the seat of your pants" was coined....
Long / Deep space exploration is impractical because of the amount of fuel, water and Oxygen that would need to be bottled and hauled with. You'd have to build a Bio-sphere type system.. a 'Mini Earth'
But I'm no rocket scientist..
...not to mention the real distances you're talking about. Our movies today have our minds so misguided in terms of what deep space is really like. All of these Star Trek images of hopping around different galaxies is absolutely ridiculous. The Milky Way is about 100,000 light years across, and we're about 26,000 light years from the edge. That means that you could travel at light speed for 25,000 years and not reach the edge. Our recorded history is roughly 6,000 years. It would take almost 5 times that at light-speed travel just to get to the closest exit from our galaxy (of course, that's edge-on)! So, unless we can figure out how to go thousands of times faster than light speed, or learn how to create wormholes (which, of course are only theoretical to begin with) with known locations on either end, the whole ball of wax is kind of absurd. But don't let facts and logic throw you off course.
Manned flight was ridiculous back before December 17, 1903 too
What makes something seem ridiculous to our knowledge now could in fact become reality in the future.Yeah, well, we're not talking about mimicking a bird's ability to fly. We're talking about moving much, much faster than anything in the known universe is capable of doing. That's a little bit different.
-
@art_of_shred said:
@Bill-Kindle said:
@art_of_shred said:
@g.jacobse said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Yeah, it was absolutely crazy and terrifying.
Which is why (at least I think) the phrase "Flying by the seat of your pants" was coined....
Long / Deep space exploration is impractical because of the amount of fuel, water and Oxygen that would need to be bottled and hauled with. You'd have to build a Bio-sphere type system.. a 'Mini Earth'
But I'm no rocket scientist..
...not to mention the real distances you're talking about. Our movies today have our minds so misguided in terms of what deep space is really like. All of these Star Trek images of hopping around different galaxies is absolutely ridiculous. The Milky Way is about 100,000 light years across, and we're about 26,000 light years from the edge. That means that you could travel at light speed for 25,000 years and not reach the edge. Our recorded history is roughly 6,000 years. It would take almost 5 times that at light-speed travel just to get to the closest exit from our galaxy (of course, that's edge-on)! So, unless we can figure out how to go thousands of times faster than light speed, or learn how to create wormholes (which, of course are only theoretical to begin with) with known locations on either end, the whole ball of wax is kind of absurd. But don't let facts and logic throw you off course.
Manned flight was ridiculous back before December 17, 1903 too
What makes something seem ridiculous to our knowledge now could in fact become reality in the future.Yeah, well, we're not talking about mimicking a bird's ability to fly. We're talking about moving much, much faster than anything in the known universe is capable of doing. That's a little bit different.
People used to think that traveling at speeds would stop you from breathing too. http://www.historyextra.com/railway
"Thundering along at previously unimaginable speeds, early steam locomotives were a frightening prospect for their Victorian passengers. Before the opening of the first major railway line, the Liverpool & Manchester in 1830, there were fears it would be impossible to breathe while travelling at such a velocity, or that the passengers’ eyes would be damaged by having to adjust to the motion." -
Yes, I get that. Still it has nothing to do with this discussion. We have a pretty good understanding of the world around us today. That was not the case 150 years ago. I'm sure we think we know some things that will be proven wrong years from now. At one time the world was flat (not everyone believed that, but it was the prevailing theory of its time). I'm sure we have something we believe firmly that will be proven false with better information. That being said, what does any of that have to do with the speed of light? Teleportation is within the realm of becoming a reality. Bionic implants and the like are on the doorstep. Cloaking devices, too. Cold fusion is even in the news again. Still, what do we know of that can travel faster than light? Oh yeah... nothing. The fundamental concepts on which modern physics is built doesn't leave much hope for travel beyond light-speed. But that's not even my point. We're not talking about going faster than light. We're talking about going thousands of times faster than light. Unless you have some pixie dust up your sleeve, I don't see that as worth even discussing, at least not in any kind of constructive way.
-
@art_of_shred said:
Yes, I get that. Still it has nothing to do with this discussion. We have a pretty good understanding of the world around us today. That was not the case 150 years ago. I'm sure we think we know some things that will be proven wrong years from now. At one time the world was flat (not everyone believed that, but it was the prevailing theory of its time). I'm sure we have something we believe firmly that will be proven false with better information. That being said, what does any of that have to do with the speed of light? Teleportation is within the realm of becoming a reality. Bionic implants and the like are on the doorstep. Cloaking devices, too. Cold fusion is even in the news again. Still, what do we know of that can travel faster than light? Oh yeah... nothing. The fundamental concepts on which modern physics is built doesn't leave much hope for travel beyond light-speed. But that's not even my point. We're not talking about going faster than light. We're talking about going thousands of times faster than light. Unless you have some pixie dust up your sleeve, I don't see that as worth even discussing, at least not in any kind of constructive way.
You're making my point now. What we know today can be bunk tomorrow.
I'm sorry for upsetting people, I feel like I"ve upset the apple cart.
-
No harm done. I agree with that point, but I also don't believe it has much relevance with the magnitude by which we can't approach the limiting factor. A little off, sure. Thousands of times? I just can't take that seriously as a "well, I'm sure we'll have that figured out in a couple years" sort of thing.
-
-
Nice
