|
Raenir, it's not even the second loving page of this thread and you've already destroyed a strawman you made out of a random joke post (something you whine about incessantly regarding your own insufferable and interminable screeds), made a completely irrelevant historical comparison to malaria for no discernible reason, and referenced some poo poo from Zubrin's book that nobody asked about. Note that Rappaport at no point indicated or implied being unfamiliar with other types of space habitats besides O'Neil cylinders. Please just read whatever you're quoting and think about it for ten seconds before composing another hamfisted reply.
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2023 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 18:47 |
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Also it's just bizarre to me to say that I brought up things out from nowhere when I am clearly responding to something people said; or outlined very clearly that I am responding to a larger context. But in general I'm not sure why its reasonable to assume what people know, if they didn't indicate in the post what they know or don't know? "what people said" and "a larger context" are two completely different things, the latter of which you can expand to include anything like nebulous memories of posts from the old thread, so maybe just focus on the former? And you don't have to assume knowledge or that someone is perpetuating a misconception by not enumerating every possibility. You can just ask "Are you aware that there are other proposed habitats besides O'Neill cylinders?", for example. quote:Also I don't think it's equally valid me getting annoyed at someone hypothetically strawmaning my positions, and me potentially misinterpreting a joke post. Humour is subjective, and not everyone on these forums is neurotypical, and if someone has layers of irony of course its possible it may be misinterpreted; the resolution there, is for the misinterpretation to be clarified, which I think it was? The result was a conversation. Again, you can ask a clarifying question "do you literally believe that space zombie brains will roaming all over Earth if we don't build an O'Neill cylinder for astronauts?" if you really consider it a matter of interpretation. Reframing the post as "so you think humans can't survive travel in deep space" is a strawman even before getting to the technicalities of whether the undead are a subset of or distinct from the living. Raenir Salazar posted:
Here you reply to a post that's clearly talking about small objects (with further context referring to JWST being hit by pebbles) by referencing an impactor that's estimated to have been 10km across. What is the point of this? It's not even an order of magnitude good faith interpretation of the argument. Precambrian Video Games fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Jun 12, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2023 20:10
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I'm sorry that my form of argumentation doesn't appeal to you, but I don't think it can be denied that I put effort into them, and carefully layout my positions with evidence and reasoned argument and valid grounds. I don't think it's fair to casually dismiss them as "screeds" or to call them "insufferable" this is a debate and discussion forum. In the interest of making this remotely productive, I'll request that the next time you feel that need to quote Zubrin about something, please give a more specific reference, a full passage or even a screenshot of the page from the book (which I have been unable to find at any library and am unwilling to give him money for). You can't reasonably expect everyone here to read it, let alone have a photographic memory of its contents. Or even better, if you are aware of other non-Zubrin expert sources discussing realistic/recent plans for space stations, mining (commercial or otherwise) or colonization, by all means do share.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2023 20:27
|
|
|
I personally welcome the aliens attempting to reverse biosphere collapse. Thank you.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2023 17:42
|
|
|
The aliens built an observation post for the passive tech boost, obviously.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2023 18:08
|
|
|
Parkes and GBT were both at risk of shutting down from lack of funding in the last decade so as skeptical as I am of SETI, I don't think Breakthrough Listen is a net negative in that regard. Yes, absolutely the money could have been better spent on other projects, but they're quite literally paying for their time on telescopes that are not exactly cutting edge instruments anymore so it's hard to argue that they're depriving the field as a whole. Precambrian Video Games fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Jun 22, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2023 19:37
|
|
|
LanceHunter posted:Or, you know, let's spend $100M on research that might move the needle on the crisis in cosmology and actually advance human understanding of the universe, rather than indulging in a fantasy. That link is broken, which makes it a little ironic that you quoted yourself about it for emphasis without even explaining what it was. But anyway, although I am not fond of science's (seeming) increasing reliance on the whims of billionaires for funding, or convinced that SETI is a particularly worthwhile endeavour right now, you're picking on a poor example. Not to mention that SETI scientists are well aware of this and there are plenty of papers you can find on alternative approaches besides some of the obvious ones (e.g. searching for 21cm hydrogen line emissions from solar-like stars or whatever). The Voyager golden records also cost next to nothing to produce, besides the time spent curating their contents, and have accomplished far more than in inducing interest in the sciences and provoking further philosophical considerations than whatever else Sagan et al. could have spent their time on. Same with the Arecibo message, which was never actually intended to be received by any particular hypothetical civilization in the foreseeable future.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2023 04:55
|
|
|
cat botherer posted:Oh cool. Sounds like that might happen during a galactic merger. I don't know of supermassive black holes that aren't at galactic centers, but I suppose they could be flung out occasionally into intergalactic space. That would make them hard to detect aside from gravitational lensing though. I haven't heard anything specific about these announcements but an intermediate mass black hole from a star cluster (if they exist, which they probably do) merging with a supermassive black hole is plausible, though probably less likely to be detected.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2023 17:18
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:The stream I stumbled onto and watched was very choppy and low quality but one thing I remember is the (I think) Italian guy unbuckling himself and going over to the back and turning on a PC or something. The people announcing it said this was the experimental payload and I just kept wondering what the gently caress kind of experiment can you perform in low/micro gravity for only a couple of minutes that would produce anything useful. There are microgravity experiments that are basically shining lasers into some liquid and using a high-speed camera to film how bubbles expand. I have a colleague who used to do them on commercial weightless flights so evidently a dozen or so instances of 20-30 seconds of zero-ish G was enough to get useful data. And yeah, getting to ride along without needing a grant big enough to pay for actual space travel is a big bonus.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2023 22:10
|
|
|
Avi Loeb is so exhausting.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2023 22:17
|
|
|
The Euclid space telescope released its first barely processed images yesterday: higher res here They're not going to be as visually impressive as JWST and consequently won't get as much attention, but hopefully they'll put some fancier color images up on a sky browser service for the public. And presumably they'll release some actually processed images with fewer cosmic rays and surprisingly bright ghosts (the donut-shape things, the brightest of which is in the bottom-left corner of the top-left image, and which are internal reflections and not UFOs).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2023 22:35
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I was thinking about telescopes last night and this may have been considered, but I thought I would say it anyway in case there are problems I can't really infer. Optical interferometry is very difficult and has only been done in a limited range and with modest results from the ground. NASA did have plans for a Space Interferometry Mission with much more modest separations (like, meters) on board one telescope but it was cancelled. Also note you can do plain old parallax with a single telescope over larger baselines than Earth orbit but it takes a while to get a spacescraft out to, say, Neptune. I see there are new proposals (see also the mention of LIFE at the bottom) but I don't think these have much of a chance of actually happening. I would guess that a space-based radio interferometer is more likely to happen if someone develops a large but strong and lightweight folding dish. In fact it already exists to some extent. LISA has a higher chance of actually happening than any AU-scale optical or radio interferometer.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2024 18:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 18:47 |
|
|
ashpanash posted:No one wants to be shown how wrong they are more than scientists. Whoa, I'm absolutely not interested in being proven wrong when it:s clearly Professor Wernstrom who's out to lunch.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2024 16:56
|
|