|
Raenir Salazar posted:Fairly well. Because the lateral forces of a hurricane are a pittance compared to the centrifucal forces of the Earth's rotation. The force from the Earth's rotation is distributed across the entire length. An rear end in a top hat with a bomb can put stress on an isolated section. Not to mention that a material can be sturdy enough to withstand the forces, it still remains under their stress - and therefore needs less energy to be destroyed by an external agent. It'd probably withstand a hurricane, though. dex_sda fucked around with this message at 13:49 on Nov 29, 2019 |
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 13:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 06:35 |
|
|
The closest star is like years and years for radio transmissions. Many are going to be centuries, if not thousands of years apart for radio. Without some FTL means of transmitting information culture and language will absolutely drift.dex_sda posted:The force from the Earth's rotation is distributed across the entire length. An rear end in a top hat with a bomb can put stress on an isolated section. Not to mention that a material can be sturdy enough to withstand the forces, it still remains under their stress - and therefore needs less energy to be destroyed by an external agent. An rear end in a top hat with a bomb, which would have to basically be a MOAB at minimum or some kind of bunker buster nuke, for the most part if they did it low enough, the cable just goes flying. To do it high enough such that the cable would wrap around the planet, they would need to be a state actor because they're not getting high enough with a rogue cessna. Based on most science fiction portrayals though it isn't just a cable, there is probably an outer casing or shell running up part of the length that would obviously shield it. High enough that beyond a certain point the resources of your typical terrorist aren't sufficient to get a payload up there. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 15:39 on Nov 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 15:19
|
|
|
While that is true, when dealing with a project equivalent to billions and billions of dollars in infrastructure, your terrorists are not going to be the typical terrorists. They might be funded by a state actor type of terrorist. Further, if we're banking on the wit of man to be sufficient to create that project, you can't discount the existence of a man with enough wit to turn it to dust. As far as these science fiction kinda projects go a space elevator is one of the most realistic ones, but there are gonna be problems that need to be solved. There will have to be stringent security, and with stringent security come the likely state actors providing it, and in turn, controlling what it gets used for. It's not all roses even if we make strides in material science to make it possible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 15:57
|
|
|
Imagine the strides in political science to build the most useful and valuable thing in human history an a necessarily equatorial location, and then having the whole world access it. Joking aside, putting the no space elevator in Brazil, Somalia, on Indonesia would really mess with geopolitics, and every country that didn't have good enough access would be that kind of angry state-level actor.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 16:50
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:Imagine the strides in political science to build the most useful and valuable thing in human history an a necessarily equatorial location, and then having the whole world access it. Indeed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 16:56
|
|
|
dex_sda posted:While that is true, when dealing with a project equivalent to billions and billions of dollars in infrastructure, your terrorists are not going to be the typical terrorists. They might be funded by a state actor type of terrorist. Weirdly this question doesn't get asked much about other projects that are also worth billions of dollars or risk lots of destruction if damaged like the Three Gorges Dam? Like Nuclear power plants have never been compromised or attacked, even in the chaos of the fall of the USSR. There are some obvious answers to the most common questions; anything else would need to be left up to the engineers. But its unlikely for even North Korea or any rogue state actor to want to harm the thing; we literally had this conversation already and to put it briefly, such a structure would be an international effort with the benefits distributed evenly between all of the contributing nations. There are various UN organizations that operate on similar principles. I think the idea like the US would build one and then be like FYGM is highly unlikely. You'd have something like a trusteeship council that sets up rules and regulations and arbitrates cost sharing and benefits distribution; with the home nation hosting the cable getting most of the benefits from facilitating interplanetary trade. The most creative and innovative terrorists in real life have been using smartphones, rc drones and 3D printers to produce weapons small enough and distributed enough to not be easily intercepted and to get under most heavy weapons to do pinpoint harassment of security forces. None of managed anything much more than that, the most elaborate and heavy hitting terrorist attacks required some sort of delivery vehicle like a speedboat, a cessna, or a hijacked passenger liner. And in response security about these things in regards to strategic assets have gotten a lot better. None of managed to do anything beyond this; so the idea a more advanced HYDRA like terrorist organization with capabilities matching a state actor is very unlikely. The closest that exists is the Iranian Revolutionary Guard launching a cruise missile at Saudi Arabia; but this is such apples and oranges that its virtually incomparable. Iran wouldn't attack a space elevator since it benefits from its existence. You can basically build a skyscrapper outer case to protect the base from bomb trucks or the like; like the X-SEED 4000 which is a 4km tall building with a 6km wide base and hold a million people. You can build it out in the ocean as well on something like an artificial island and it wouldn't be vulnerable to mining or submarines short of a nuke. From there you protect it from aircraft the sameway any other developed modern nation does. Anti air missiles and patrolling fighters, probably as part of a multinational coalition. From there you've forced your attack so high that your terrorist organization now needs their own space agency to attack it which is just plainly absurd to contemplate. Infinite Karma posted:Imagine the strides in political science to build the most useful and valuable thing in human history an a necessarily equatorial location, and then having the whole world access it. Not really? Indonesia/Malasyia hosts the straights of Malacca which is the busiest shipping lane in the world. A space elevator is basically no different from what they are used to. Again, its simple to solve; you have a UN trusteeship council that manages it; with an executive board that has representatives from the principle stakeholders; and then a partnership system which distributes further cost sharing and membership dues that distributes benefits; something like a WTO but for space trade; with the ostensible idea that the elevator, like the the international space treaty or the antartica treaty is collectively owned for the common benefit of humanity and no nation would be deprived access to it. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Nov 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 17:05
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Weirdly this question doesn't get asked much about other projects that are also worth billions of dollars or risk lots of destruction if damaged like the Three Gorges Dam? Like Nuclear power plants have never been compromised or attacked, even in the chaos of the fall of the USSR. Feels disingenuous, considering that projects worth less than billions and with less use have been attacked by terrorists or state actors (crimea? 9/11? Stuxnet?) And in many cases the international response was 'meh, whatever.' US goes FYGM with nearly everything they can these days, their history is that of imperialism and projecting power to disrupt sovereign states. It is nearly all they do and the biggest reason even their allies only put up with them because of their power. If they have a controlling stake in something, it'll be to flex their power. A lot of even less outwardly problematic institutions than the US of A aren't fit for fair management of a project such as this, for instance the EU and related institutions have largely fostered right wing swntiment in poorer countries thanks to austerity politics. They, too, are a tool for the strong to get stronger, even if they have a lot of redeeming factors. (I still think they are a good thing overall, but with something with space elevator's grandeur assuming they would do good is uncertain) Even amazing projects like LISA and all are mostly seen as a tool to flex technological might, and are rife with politics. And that's projects for merely millions done mostly for scientific progress. A space elevator has far more reaching geopolitical implications, and with that, far more reasons for being a target. Your post feels naive as far as politics goes, and that's not even getting into the fact that in a capitalistic society some companies - which may end up having the controlling stake in such a project - will buttfuck everyone and pervert the peaceful purposes we might start the project with. dex_sda fucked around with this message at 17:27 on Nov 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 17:25
|
|
|
I'm not interested in debating your sense of cynicism because it clouds your willingness to just look at things from a humanistic point of view regarding their "on paper" cost-benefit analysis, because you're just making up things out of whole cloth in exceedingly more ridiculous handwaved scenarios that just come down to your pessimism and not any factual or refutable evidence. The United Nations actually has a hugely unsung successful history of international cooperation, arbitration, and conflict resolution, and that maybe you should do some research on your own before insisting your perspective is just inherently more correct. Also the Three Gorges Dam is one of THE MOST expensive engineering projects known to man. Approximate 31 billion$ USD, if that doesn't meet your "billions and billions" metric then I don't know what does and maybe you're the one being a disingenuous wet blanket?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 17:35
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:The United Nations actually has a hugely unsung successful history of international cooperation, arbitration, and conflict resolution, and that maybe you should do some research on your own before insisting your perspective is just inherently more correct. quote:Also the Three Gorges Dam is one of THE MOST expensive engineering projects known to man. Approximate 31 billion$ USD, if that doesn't meet your "billions and billions" metric then I don't know what does and maybe you're the one being a disingenuous wet blanket? Sure does (SE would be far more expensive but that's pedantry of no import), however, you continue to ignore the geopolitical implications that it doesn't have and a space elevator would.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 17:49
|
|
|
dex_sda posted:Never claimed anything about the United Nations being an unsuccessful entity. However, with their history of successes and overall benefit to the world also comes a history of failures and impotence. Crimea is one of those things, for instance. i do not blame them, for the situation is difficult politically and they are trying their best. But that is precisely my point. I'm not ignoring the geopolitical implications; you are just assuming the worst case scenario instead one of the many more likely scenarios because of some strange anti-american bias despite successful international projects like the ISS (120 billion$). Crimea is entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Again, I am not debating your nihilism; if you insist on the glass being half empty when everyone else claims it is half full then there is no convincing you and you should probably just drop the topic. Bring up something actually relevant and concrete and not bland overwrought skepticism on the very concept of international cooperation and conflict resolution.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 17:54
|
|
|
Like I sympathize with wanting to have a humanistic outlook, I do think humanity is capable of quite amazing things and scientific progress, but at the same time I have to take into account that it's equally capable of tribalism and conflict. We are at the cusp of a self inflicted catastrophe and yet the response from state level actors is tepid at best, and cooperation with even those insufficient targets is not going that great. Asserting that something with the importance and use of a space elevator will not have huge implications and huge political problems connected to it feels like wishful thinking.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 17:59
|
|
|
It isn't productive to just seesaw between an optimistic paradigm to a nihilistic one; there's no real evidence being presented to support your worldview here and has clearly grown past the point of merely raising concerns for considerations to the point you seem to be positively asserting how you believe the world works and why we can't have nice things and that's droll and obnoxious as the earlier conversation about what scientific progress is possible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 18:47
|
|
|
I'd say a far greater threat to space elevators is fuckers like Elon musk polluting leo with random crap to the point Keppler syndrome happens
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 19:28
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:I'd say a far greater threat to space elevators is fuckers like Elon musk polluting leo with random crap to the point Keppler syndrome happens Cant we just push things out of earth orbit with pinpoint lasers?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 19:31
|
|
|
Space elevators won't be built if food, water, security and energy can't be supplied to the populace at large.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 19:36
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Space elevators won't be built if food, water, security and energy can't be supplied to the populace at large. This is just patently untrue. The military gets funded regardless of food insecurity in the US. WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:Cant we just push things out of earth orbit with pinpoint lasers? Kessler Syndrome is potentially an issue because people theorize there's some critical mass of stuff in space where one loose screw hitting something causes a shotgun blast of debris that takes everything else out. But there is a lot of junk in space as it is, like something like 100,000 little bits being tracked by radar and kessler syndrome is something people are working on various solutions for. There's multiple propose solutions; a space elevator makes it easier to take care of kessler syndrome because instead of traditional space flight which results in loads of junk; stuff brought up in a space elevator results in waaaaaay less discarded junk and is easier to assemble stuff in orbit that we can use to clean up LEO.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 20:03
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:This is just patently untrue. The military gets funded regardless of food insecurity in the US. Right yeah, I'm more concerned that if access to space becomes cheap enough that construction of a space elevator is feasible capitalists will use that to go full tragedy of the commons
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 20:08
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:Right yeah, I'm more concerned that if access to space becomes cheap enough that construction of a space elevator is feasible capitalists will use that to go full tragedy of the commons This feels like something where the presumptive absolute authority of sovereign states delegating to international bodies with teeth would kick around any capitalist that did that in the intermediate future. The EU and China for instance command considerable power and many companies quickly come into compliance with their rules. A simple tax regimen on corporations using the elevator to retain and pay for the expenses of cleanup orgs makes the most amount of sense. Basically like that one anime about a crew of space garbage people cleaning up LEO of space junk. By the time nation states get dwarfed by multinational corporations we're probably so far advanced that the space junk is far less of an issue.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 20:26
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:This feels like something where the presumptive absolute authority of sovereign states delegating to international bodies with teeth would kick around any capitalist that did that in the intermediate future. The EU and China for instance command considerable power and many companies quickly come into compliance with their rules. A simple tax regimen on corporations using the elevator to retain and pay for the expenses of cleanup orgs makes the most amount of sense. Basically like that one anime about a crew of space garbage people cleaning up LEO of space junk.  you're far more confident in the ability of the state to restrain the depravities of the bourgeois than I am
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 20:50
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:This is just patently untrue. The military gets funded regardless of food insecurity in the US. Pathetic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 21:04
|
|
|
I just feel like the process of building a space elevator would involve so many custodians and multinational partners that it would take considerable time before we end up in some kind of shadowrun-esque future and by that point technology will have advanced to the point that space debris is somewhat less of a big deal. Not that we won't ever end up in a Shadowrun-esque future, there's just a sequence of steps involved. Arglebargle III posted:Pathetic. You didn't present is as a "should" or an "aught-to" problem; you just passed it off as fact when it's trivially disproven, what's your problem?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 21:07
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I just feel like the process of building a space elevator would involve so many custodians and multinational partners that it would take considerable time before we end up in some kind of shadowrun-esque future and by that point technology will have advanced to the point that space debris is somewhat less of a big deal. Musk is sending up pointless satellites right now. I simply think that the tendency to move fast and break things will outrace the ability of governments to regulate said behavior. e: to be clear i don't think this is guaranteed, but rather that of all threats to the construction of a space elevator, capitalism's demand for profit at all costs, no matter the possibility of ruining a public good for everyone, has the best chance of rendering a space elevator untenable. well, besides everyone dying to global warming obviously A big flaming stink fucked around with this message at 21:12 on Nov 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:You didn't present is as a "should" or an "aught-to" problem; you just passed it off as fact when it's trivially disproven, what's your problem? Space elevators won't be built if food, water, security and energy can't be supplied to the populace at large.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 21:11
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:Musk is sending up pointless satellites right now. I simply think that the tendency to move fast and break things will outrace the ability of governments to regulate said behavior. The idea you I think it was were presented was the idea that by virtue of having a space elevator; there's an order of magnitude more junk that (companies) will send up to clog up space in a tragedy of the commons. Musk is being contracted out tasks by NASA and isn't really contributing more to the problem than a fully funded and functional space program would; China, the ESA, Roskosmos, NASA etc are all sending up both commercial and military and scientific stuff into LEO. I think it's very different kettle of fish because SpaceX is basically just acting like a independent contractor for NASA and is getting stuff to do that NASA would otherwise be doing. Most of the exploding rockets happens well in the atmosphere or on the launch pad and I'm unsure as I haven't looked into it but wasn't SpaceX's whole thing trying to engineer reuseable rockets? There is probably somewhat less junk so in all honesty Musk isn't actually contributing to the problem. The barrier of entry to get into space exploration and exploitation is freakishly huge and isn't something we have to worry about... Yet. Hence why presumably you caught onto the idea of a space elevator possibly enabling some sort of tragedy of the commons situation, which does make sense in broad strokes even if it kinda maybe falls apart in the details. With a space elevator the barrier of entry becomes non-existent. Any decently capitalized firm capable of building a fancy sports car can probably get into the business of making whats basically a fancy space plane to travel in LEO, to the moon; or latch onto tugs to zip around the moons of Mars or Jupiter once the infrastructure gets there. So you'll have a lot more people getting into space and presumably a lot more junk. So that's all valid to a point; but that early "getting stuff up there", building the first orbital processing plants, the first lunar and martian base and exploratory missions to the asteroid belt would almost certainly have massive state involvement with a lot of companies being contracted tasks; these early companies probably evolve into dystopian zaibatsu's centuries from now but right now they aren't a concern in the process. So any company that wants to do something probably pays a fee to use the elevator and those fees involve cleanup and maintenance costs which gets subcontracted out to a cleanup firm setup by NASA/JAXA etc to zap metal poo poo out of LEO. But lets say some private company buys or assembles a tug in space and something catastrophic happens. It's generally expected that the space elevator itself is PROBABLY pretty safe for space debris; so even is some sats get smashed to bits and the world economy staggers for a bit; you just bring up some armoured contingency space cleanup machines into LEO up that same elevator and it goes to work absorbing and zapping and catching all the stuff it can until LEO is safe again for stuff. The counter weight for a space elevator at the very end of the tether is MASSIVELY far above LEO, so the actual launching and assembly point is safe; so your cleanup vehicle can just pop off the cable as its 1/4 the way up the cable to zip around in orbit to clean things up. Honestly a space elevator makes the job so much easier that I imagine cleaning up our junk is probably one of the first things we do if we haven't already by then. The cable car traveling up basically could have a skyhook attached to catch our cleanup ships. In the years we're spending planning and building the first elevator I imagine contingencies for cleanup and preventing kessler syndrome get a lot of serious attention and a lot of disasters get simulated and planned for. Arglebargle III posted:Space elevators won't be built if food, water, security and energy can't be supplied to the populace at large. What if. The Space elevator is needed to feed people? You're just repeating yourself now without actually engaging with what I said.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 21:26
|
|
|
oh, no, let me be clear. I think that as space flight becomes more economical, companies like musk will just throw poo poo up into LEO faster than governments can regulate it, and that the tendency to not give a gently caress about long term consequences has a non-negligible chance to induce kessler syndrome, which would make the construction of a space elevator untenable. I think if a space elevator is already constructed then kessler syndrome has no chance to be induce barring something bizarre, because governments will be far more capable of regulating who uses the elevator itself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 21:29
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:This is just patently untrue. The military gets funded regardless of food insecurity in the US. These are your two attempts to rebut the idea that space megastructures will not be constructed if food, energy, water, and security cannot be supplied to the population. They are pathetic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 21:32
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:oh, no, let me be clear. Right, I don't think space flight becomes more economical to such an extent before a space elevator becomes realized or some other kind of megastructure like skyhooks or skyloops. Arglebargle III posted:These are your two attempts to rebut the idea that space megastructures will not be constructed if food, energy, water, and security cannot be supplied to the population. Are you going to keep on Kerning Chameleoning or do you actually have an argument as to how awesome stuff can't happen as long as starving orphans exist somewhere? The existence of someone somewhere starving doesn't magically prevent me from buying a new computer. A space elevator is just a bunch of governments buying something cool and useful; it has nothing to do with food insecurity or anything. But keep on your trolling I guess, you do you. How does some segment of the population experiencing food insecurity prevent governments from building a space elevator, by what mechanism?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 21:40
|
|
|
_____ will not be done if food, energy, water and security are not delivered to enough of the population. Plenty still gets done/will be done as millions suffer. Besides if there's a space elevator it'll get built on the moon first with maybe a skyhook near or in earth orbit to follow. e:fb this always happens whenever I mention a skyhook arrghh
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 21:44
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Space elevators won't be built if food, water, security and energy can't be supplied to the populace at large.  Btw folks argle bargle routinely spams his youtube channel with poo poo music on it and calls it "thread music"
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 21:45
|
|
|
Its like he's never heard of the Soviet Five Year Plans or the Great Leap Forward. Not that those are at all an ideal; but they solidly disprove the notion that you "Can't do X without Y". Maybe he's trying to argue that you morally shouldn't do X before Y is settled, though that involves actual nuance. Like... Why not both?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 21:50
|
|
|
Space flight is one thing, but as climate refugees climb past 5% of the Earth's population these future material megastructures aren't going to get any closer. This isn't going to happen. The next century is going to be about figuring out how to keep civilization going, not whatever it is you think you're discussing in here. I've been reading the last few pages and have commented on just a few of the fundamental misunderstandings of science I've seen. And I don't have a youtube channel, to give anyone reading an idea of the caliber of thought in this discussion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 21:55
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Space flight is one thing, but as climate refugees climb past 5% of the Earth's population these future material megastructures aren't going to get any closer. This isn't going to happen. The next century is going to be about figuring out how to keep civilization going, not whatever it is you think you're discussing in here. I've been reading the last few pages and have commented on just a few of the fundamental misunderstandings of science I've seen. For the record I think this is more likely than not to be the case. I just differ with argle about the degree of certainty. and I guess if Bernie wins we might have a chance at averting outright catastrophe, so all you futurists should go volunteer for Bernie 
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 22:03
|
|
|
I don't think we're going to be building megastructures anytime soon either but I at this point I think we're going to see spaceflight development for a variety of reasons both political and practical even as civilization crumbles, whether it's too little too late is something we're going to be privileged or cursed to find out for ourselves
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 22:27
|
|
|
Human ingenuity has never been challenged by the lack of food for the people. We made it past the black plague with a decimated population. A majority of humans dying off 50-75% still leaves us a billion or 2 people. Its more likely we will die due to resource wars when half the worlds oil is depleted completely
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 22:39
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Space flight is one thing, but as climate refugees climb past 5% of the Earth's population these future material megastructures aren't going to get any closer. This isn't going to happen. The next century is going to be about figuring out how to keep civilization going, not whatever it is you think you're discussing in here. I've been reading the last few pages and have commented on just a few of the fundamental misunderstandings of science I've seen. There is zero reason to believe climate change would serious affect our ability to build a space elevator. The space elevator could be a solution as it would allow us to move industry off world or colonize Mars. The number of refugees in the world doesn't have any practical bearing on say, a research facility in China to have funding; because functioning nations that direct resources to those projects regardless of the overall state of the world. Again, not the best example all things being considered, but the USSR had something like several million dead from mass famines but still reached considerable growth in GDP and industrialization. You again, don't appear to have any evidence to support your claim.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 23:34
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:There is zero reason to believe climate change would serious affect our ability to build a space elevator. Man nobody can have a conversation about anything when you drop dumb poo poo like this
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 23:41
|
|
|
The equatorial area where it would be built being unable to support human life would probably be a pretty big problem for space elevator architects. Along with the massive political instability in the countries where it would be built. But nah, we'll just create a tax on rides to space and itll be fine! Also all our food will come down from space for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 23:50
|
|
|
Tighclops posted:Man nobody can have a conversation about anything when you drop dumb poo poo like this Right? We can't even have conversations normally anymore because of climate change (and the impact of propaganda from parties who stand to gain in the short term by maintaining status quo), how the gently caress are we gonna get our poo poo together enough to build a space elevator.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2019 23:52
|
|
|
Kesper North posted:Right? We can't even have conversations normally anymore because of climate change (and the impact of propaganda from parties who stand to gain in the short term by maintaining status quo), how the gently caress are we gonna get our poo poo together enough to build a space elevator. More specifically, the countries on the equator where a space elevator would have to be built are some degree of unstable, developing, corrupt, or otherwise not powerful and influential. A) those countries are going to want a piece of the action, and it will be a literal proxy war for the big world powers to have control. B) climate change is likely to negatively affect the equatorial region even more than the rest of the world. Just look at how the Olympics fucks with developing nations, and then put a hundred trillion dollars into one of them that opens up a quintillion dollar market for everybody with enough money to build spaceworthy machines. It's a lot of incentive for cheating the rules.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2019 00:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 06:35 |
|
|
dex_sda posted:You're completely missing my point. This thread might be a place to talk about future pie in the sky tech, but it means that it ceases to be a good place to discuss actually realistic space related tech. I think it actually shows a lack of imagination to avoid looking into what we already could do and instead think about what our great-great-great grandchildren might possibly do, if it's even possible? Out of curiosity, where do you draw the line between realistic space tech and sci-fi that belongs in the Book Barn? Is a completely speculative re-design of a Saturn V using modern materials and tech realistic, or is it sci-fi? What about a Mars Cycler? dex_sda posted:e; I guess I should also explain why I think tempering expectations is important. There is a growing trend (mainly on social media) to misrepresent science. Most visibly, it's people denying the poo poo we already know, but on the flipside and equally confusing to a layman is the sentiment of the "I loving love science" pages that have already become something of a meme at this point. Scientist predictions get blown out of proportions, things get misreported... and down the line, when the promised land doesn't come, trust in scientific findings and messaging diminishes. The "I loving love science" Facebook pages aren't plural, it's just one, the one named that. It popped up out of nowhere by leveraging social media to responsibly popularize science, in competition with the existing pop science industry like Discovery News and the flaws it had. IFLS was great at first but then it got hijacked by one of the founders who monetized the brand and cut out all the other founders out who were trying to popularize science responsibly instead of make money. After that the quality of IFLS went way the gently caress down because it turned into a clickbait website that's now much worse than the average pop science publication. Remembering this also reminds me I met the IFLS hijacker at Pittcon one year. It had to have been just after her takeover as she was popular enough to be at a chemistry conference and also alone because that was the period of time when she was lying and saying she had built IFLS without help. dex_sda posted:There are plenty of loving cool things that we're already doing. Exoplanet hunts. Landing on comets. Noticing interstellar objects in our solar system. Taking a photo of a black hole using earth as a telescope. Finding galaxies without dark matter. Higgs boson, new quarks... the list goes on. All these things are way more metal than "we'll be sending AIs everywhere soon!" Fifth fundamental force. Fifth fundamental force. Fifth fundamental force. Fifth fundamental force. Fifth fundamental force.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2019 00:27
|
|
