Massacre In Gaza - Black Saturday

On 5 Jan, 12:58, (Rand Simberg) wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 04:02:56 -0800 (PST), in a place far, far away, Ian
Parker made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

It is hard to distiguish right from wrong. Emotionally I feel there
should be a ceasfire, Saudi should be put back on the table etc.

Yes, because that's all you ever do is "emotionally feel." *You never
seem to actually think.

You certainly don't. We need to have an open mind on a variety of
things.

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/sci...5b08375a?hl=en

I do not say that he is right. I have tried simply to have a basis for
discussion. Do you go to the Moon? Do you go to Mars? Are asteroids
the best bet? Is a moon like Phobos a good bet. Essentially an
asteroid attached to Mars. I include another article.

http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/1989/89GL00073.shtml

Go there? We need to think.

Analysis has shown that a telescope on the Moon is inferior to
fragments/interferometers in free space. These are analysed facts.

This thread is as I said not really about Gaza which we can do little
about. It is about how we conduct ourselves.


- Ian Parker

Ian Parker wrote:
:
:I do not say that he is right. I have tried simply to have a basis for
:discussion. Do you go to the Moon? Do you go to Mars? Are asteroids
:the best bet? Is a moon like Phobos a good bet. Essentially an
:asteroid attached to Mars. I include another article.
:
:http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/1989/89GL00073.shtml
:
:Go there? We need to think.
:

Your 'thinking' above amounts to wondering whether a child should
learn to crawl first, walk, run, or just compete in the Olympics.

:
:Analysis has shown that a telescope on the Moon is inferior to
:fragments/interferometers in free space. These are analysed facts.
:

Cite?

It rather depends on just what you're trying to do which is 'better',
Ian...


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn

Quadibloc wrote:
How long before one of the usual murder-suicides is replaced by
someone exterminating all human life on Earth with a hacked gadget or
two?


That would be a pretty impressive "hacked gadget". :-D

Pat

On 5 Jan, 15:56, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Ian Parker wrote:

:
:I do not say that he is right. I have tried simply to have a basis for
:discussion. Do you go to the Moon? Do you go to Mars? Are asteroids
:the best bet? Is a moon like Phobos a good bet. Essentially an
:asteroid attached to Mars. I include another article.
:
:http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/1989/89GL00073.shtml
:
:Go there? We need to think.
:

Your 'thinking' above amounts to wondering whether a child should
learn to crawl first, walk, run, or just compete in the Olympics.

No, it is a question of how you rate difficulty. Phobos is easier to
get to than Mars itself. This is a function of gravity wells.
Basically in space you do not want to be stuck in a gravity well.
Ideally you would like to go somewhere which you can get to with ion
propulsion. Asteroids are ideal in this. In fact if you talk in terms
of gravity wells Phobos is EASIER to get to than the Moon.

Should we go there? It is certainly a better spot than the Moon. There
is the possibility, as I think I have said, of telepresence on Mars
itself. Quite a lot going really. Mars itself is of course the
argument for Phobos/Deimos rather than an random asteroid.

:
:Analysis has shown that a telescope on the Moon is inferior to
:fragments/interferometers in free space. These are analysed facts.
:

On the Moon gravity is about 1/6 of that on Earth. You still have
gravity though. If you are in free space you can manoever your
fragments freely. What is the upper limit of size. Well, could I say 5
million km which is the coherence distance of the LISA lasers. OK LISA
works on the basis of a known speed rather than a stationary speed.

The Moon is geologically dead, but there are still meteorite impacts
which will interfere with ultra stability.

It rather depends on just what you're trying to do which is 'better',
Ian...

Yes it does. We need to look at the purposes of the space program. How
does each mission fit in overall?


- Ian Parker

Ian Parker wrote:

:On 5 Jan, 15:56, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Ian Parker wrote:
:
: :
: :I do not say that he is right. I have tried simply to have a basis for
: :discussion. Do you go to the Moon? Do you go to Mars? Are asteroids
: :the best bet? Is a moon like Phobos a good bet. Essentially an
: :asteroid attached to Mars. I include another article.
: :
: :http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/1989/89GL00073.shtml
: :
: :Go there? We need to think.
: :
:
: Your 'thinking' above amounts to wondering whether a child should
: learn to crawl first, walk, run, or just compete in the Olympics.
:
:No, it is a question of how you rate difficulty. Phobos is easier to
:get to than Mars itself.
:

I didn't say which of your alternatives corresponded to what in my
analogy.

:
This is a function of gravity wells.
:Basically in space you do not want to be stuck in a gravity well.
:Ideally you would like to go somewhere which you can get to with ion
ropulsion. Asteroids are ideal in this. In fact if you talk in terms
f gravity wells Phobos is EASIER to get to than the Moon.
:

But gravity wells isn't the way to think about it.

:
:Should we go there? It is certainly a better spot than the Moon.
:

Oh? I see no reason to believe that.

:
:
: :
: :Analysis has shown that a telescope on the Moon is inferior to
: :fragments/interferometers in free space. These are analysed facts.
: :
:
:On the Moon gravity is about 1/6 of that on Earth. You still have
:gravity though. If you are in free space you can manoever your
:fragments freely. What is the upper limit of size. Well, could I say 5
:million km which is the coherence distance of the LISA lasers. OK LISA
:works on the basis of a known speed rather than a stationary speed.
:

You still don't understand the difference between VLBA and a single
large sensor, do you? But I understand you had to bring LISA up
again.

Your author really needs to add more grist to your intellectual mill.
You're still sadly predictable.

:
:The Moon is geologically dead, but there are still meteorite impacts
:which will interfere with ultra stability.
:

And you work around them the same way you work around such things on
Earth.

:
: It rather depends on just what you're trying to do which is 'better',
: Ian...
:
:Yes it does. We need to look at the purposes of the space program. How
:does each mission fit in overall?
:

I was talking specifically about astronomical observatories, which was
your subject of the moment.


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn

On Jan 5, 9:42*am, Pat Flannery wrote:
Quadibloc wrote:

How long before one of the usual murder-suicides is replaced by
someone exterminating all human life on Earth with a hacked gadget or
two?

That would be a pretty impressive "hacked gadget". :-D

Not available in stores yet, but apparently, if one believes Ian
Parker, in a few years or so. But add to that, say, some common
household chemicals, and perhaps some bacteria grown in a basement
lab.

Perhaps "a whole city" is more reasonable than "all human life on
Earth"; that would still be enoough to be intolerable.

John Savard