|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)
On Monday, 20 February 2017 06:50:04 UTC+1, Chris L Peterson wrote:
I do not doubt that millions upon millions of other developed civilizations exist in this universe... Maybe. But it's possible that most or all are like us, unlikely to survive as a technological species long enough to venture far from their birthplace before going extinct. "Humanity" is by far the favourite tragicomic, reality show for countless civilizations. See millions of strange and unique creatures being tortured and killed in every single episode! Snuff movie entertainment for all the family! Don't miss a single, mind boggling installment! Set your time shifter and start binging now! Brought to you by Galaxyflix.univ.com. A wholly-owned subsidiary of Godfix.univ.com. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)
On Sunday, February 19, 2017 at 10:50:04 PM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 19 Feb 2017 20:00:02 -0800, BogeyOne wrote: My thinking is that science is not capable of everything and visiting even the nearest stars is a good example. It is well within our scientific capacity, and the engineering problems could be solved in short order, to make practical robotic trips to a few nearby stars with mission times under a century (which is still problematic given our political and social immaturity). I do not doubt that millions upon millions of other developed civilizations exist in this universe... Maybe. But it's possible that most or all are like us, unlikely to survive as a technological species long enough to venture far from their birthplace before going extinct. Nihilistic nonsense. AGW will certainly not be the cause of such extinction, so why are you so adamant about it? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)
On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 05:14:02 -0800 (PST), Gary Harnagel
wrote: On Sunday, February 19, 2017 at 10:50:04 PM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote: I do not doubt that millions upon millions of other developed civilizations exist in this universe... Maybe. But it's possible that most or all are like us, unlikely to survive as a technological species long enough to venture far from their birthplace before going extinct. Nihilistic nonsense. AGW will certainly not be the cause of such extinction, so why are you so adamant about it? You don't actually know what nihilism is, do you? And where does AGW enter in? Some obsession of yours? I didn't mention it, and I'm not talking about it. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)
On Monday, February 20, 2017 at 7:38:41 AM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 05:14:02 -0800 (PST), Gary Harnagel wrote: On Sunday, February 19, 2017 at 10:50:04 PM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote: I do not doubt that millions upon millions of other developed civilizations exist in this universe... Maybe. But it's possible that most or all are like us, unlikely to survive as a technological species long enough to venture far from their birthplace before going extinct. Nihilistic nonsense. AGW will certainly not be the cause of such extinction, so why are you so adamant about it? You don't actually know what nihilism is, do you? If you believe that the race cannot survive in the long run, then you have no basis for morals or values. And where does AGW enter in? Some obsession of yours? I didn't mention it, and I'm not talking about it. You have vigorously supported it in other threads. Are you implying that you have a compartmentalized mind? In those other threads, I have expressed doubt about it, so I'm certainly not the one "obsessed" by it. I'm just wondering how someone who will viciously attack others for not believing in AGW can justify believing that the race will die anyway. It seems that someone who holds both of those views is very conflicted. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)
On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 03:38:35 -0800 (PST), Gary Harnagel
wrote: Nihilistic nonsense. AGW will certainly not be the cause of such extinction, so why are you so adamant about it? You don't actually know what nihilism is, do you? If you believe that the race cannot survive in the long run, then you have no basis for morals or values. If you believe that, you are a genuinely scary person. I hope they don't let you be around other people unsupervised. And where does AGW enter in? Some obsession of yours? I didn't mention it, and I'm not talking about it. You have vigorously supported it in other threads. I have "supported" AGW? Not sure what that means. But it's irrelevant, since I'm not discussing it here. This is apparently the product of some obsession of yours. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)
On Sunday, February 19, 2017 at 9:00:14 PM UTC-7, BogeyOne wrote:
My thinking is that science is not capable of everything and visiting even the nearest stars is a good example. I do not doubt that millions upon millions of other developed civilizations exist in this universe, but they could not escape being bound by the same laws of physics and the restraints of time that we are. So it is best to accept that all must just sit around and ponder the "if we only could" scenario. Of course, I could be wrong. Well, I don't know either. I do think that it's unlikely science will discover a way to travel faster than light, but I don't know for sure. As for ways to travel at close to the speed of light, so that we could travel to the nearest stars in 400 to 4,000 years, _that_ is an engineering problem. It's not something I have any reason to think science is not able to do. But, on the other hand, what science may not be able to achieve is to make doing that easy enough that it would seem to humanity to be _worth_ doing. So the obstacle there is not what science can do, but how much effort and wealth we are willing to dedicate to that goal. John Savard |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)
On 21/02/2017 22:35, Quadibloc wrote:
On Sunday, February 19, 2017 at 9:00:14 PM UTC-7, BogeyOne wrote: My thinking is that science is not capable of everything and visiting even the nearest stars is a good example. I do not doubt that millions upon millions of other developed civilizations exist in this universe, but they could not escape being bound by the same laws of physics and the restraints of time that we are. So it is best to accept that all must just sit around and ponder the "if we only could" scenario. Of course, I could be wrong. Well, I don't know either. I do think that it's unlikely science will discover a way to travel faster than light, but I don't know for sure. As for ways to travel at close to the speed of light, so that we could travel to the nearest stars in 400 to 4,000 years, _that_ is an engineering problem. It's not something I have any reason to think science is not able to do. But, on the other hand, what science may not be able to achieve is to make doing that easy enough that it would seem to humanity to be _worth_ doing. Juno at 165k mph is about the fastest space probe we have ever sent. Compared to the speed of light which is 186000 miles a *second* we are about 4 orders of magnitude short of the mark for relativistic travel. Until we can do it in under a 1000 years or so elapsed it is probably faster to sit on our hands and wait for the technology to improve. So the obstacle there is not what science can do, but how much effort and wealth we are willing to dedicate to that goal. There are some pretty severe engineering challenges too. Even at Earth orbital speeds tiny dust grains are a big threat but as you go faster they become much much worse. At truly relativistic speeds blue shifted background microwave radiation and shockwaves from adiabatically compressing the incredibly thin interstellar medium become problematic too when you are ploughing through so much of it in a second. -- Regards, Martin Brown |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)
On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 7:39:54 AM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 03:38:35 -0800 (PST), Gary Harnagel wrote: Nihilistic nonsense. AGW will certainly not be the cause of such extinction, so why are you so adamant about it? You don't actually know what nihilism is, do you? If you believe that the race cannot survive in the long run, then you have no basis for morals or values. If you believe that, you are a genuinely scary person. I hope they don't let you be around other people unsupervised. I feel the same way about YOU because you have one less restraint on your behavior than I do. And where does AGW enter in? Some obsession of yours? I didn't mention it, and I'm not talking about it. You have vigorously supported it in other threads. I have "supported" AGW? Not sure what that means. Oh, come on, Peterson! You know EXACTLY what I'm referring to. Google keeps a record. Your one-less-restraint is raising its ugly head. wsne said: "There are many things that are FAR more important to most people than climate change and justifiably so." And YOU said: "Nothing I can think of is more important, as the continuation of our civilization largely depends upon our dealing with it." But it's irrelevant, since I'm not discussing it here. So you DO have a compartmentalized mind. That's also very scary. This is apparently the product of some obsession of yours. Perhaps. It may be due to the deep scarring you perpetrated on me with your ad hominem attacks when I differed with your opinions about AGW. But THAT is irrelevant. It is irrational for you to do that when you also believe that mankind is doomed to extinction anyway. Do you get pleasure out of inflicting mental pain on others? |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 03:27:37 -0800 (PST), Gary Harnagel
wrote: If you believe that, you are a genuinely scary person. I hope they don't let you be around other people unsupervised. I feel the same way about YOU because you have one less restraint on your behavior than I do. I have excellent restraint on my behavior- restraints that are grounded in objective reason. You, on the other hand, are perhaps like Abraham- willing to commit any crime if a voice in your head requires it. That is scary. I have "supported" AGW? Not sure what that means. Oh, come on, Peterson! You know EXACTLY what I'm referring to. Google keeps a record. Your one-less-restraint is raising its ugly head. I can guess. But your comment isn't coherent enough to be certain what you mean. In any case, your ranting on about AGW when it has nothing to do with my comments above simply reveals obsessive fixation on me or my ideas, and makes you look pretty foolish here. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Planet near Proxima Centauri (Travel time)
On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 1:48:33 AM UTC-8, RichA wrote:
Earth-like? I'd believe it when they get there. Here's the travel time: -Current rocket technology (if a large enough one could be built): 120,000mph. 25,000 years to get there. -Project Orion 10,000 ton class ship: 80% speed of light peak speed. 14 years. http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2016...d-orig-nws.cnn We can't even get humans to Mars, never mined to another solar system. We found out, there is no other life in our solar system, not even a lousy bacteria, so now it's a new flight of imagination , maybe some thing exist in another solar system. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Proxima b is a science fiction planet | Double-A[_4_] | Misc | 0 | September 10th 16 07:24 PM |
Planet of Proxima Centauri? | Mike Collins[_4_] | Amateur Astronomy | 99 | September 2nd 16 04:05 PM |
Alpha Centauri has a planet | granite stone | Astronomy Misc | 32 | December 3rd 09 03:50 AM |
proxima centauri flares dangerous | Bernhard Kuemel | Misc | 4 | August 23rd 09 09:58 PM |
If one of our neighboring stars like Proxima Centauri went nova... | Jason Macadamia | Amateur Astronomy | 21 | January 31st 05 12:53 AM |