Mars and beyond

On 28 Aug 2003 11:50:42 GMT, Andrew Gray
wrote:

In article , Christopher wrote:

The Daily Mail isn't a dumb newspaper.

laughing

No, it just prints dumb stuff, and some people are dumb enough to
believe it.

Its a better newspaper then The Sun.

A friend of mine got a photo in the Sun, the other day. I was ashamed.

Regardless, "a better newspaper than The Sun" is somewhat like saying "a
richer country than Mali"; it doesn't so much narrow the field as define
the baseline.

The Suns a better newspaper then The Sport though.


Christopher
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Kites rise highest against
the wind - not with it."
Winston Churchill

In article , Christopher wrote:
A friend of mine got a photo in the Sun, the other day. I was ashamed.

Regardless, "a better newspaper than The Sun" is somewhat like saying "a
richer country than Mali"; it doesn't so much narrow the field as define
the baseline.

The Suns a better newspaper then The Sport though.

Okay, so we're hitting "richer country than Grand Fenwick" (yes, I
know). Admittedly, you could choose to introduce the Star here and I'd
have to revise my analogy (perhaps even promoting the Sun to, ooh,
El Salvador-level), but the general principle stands.

--
-Andrew Gray

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 10:30:44 GMT, in a place far, far away,
(Christopher) made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

Stop being an idiot by stop getting your space information out of dumb
newspapers.

The Daily Mail isn't a dumb newspaper.

laughing

No, it just prints dumb stuff, and some people are dumb enough to
believe it.

Its a better newspaper then The Sun.

So? Who was defending the Sun?

Do you ever have anything relevant to say about anything?

--
simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)
interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org

"Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."
Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me.
Here's my email address for autospammers:

No, it just prints dumb stuff, and some people are dumb enough to
believe it.

Its a better newspaper then The Sun.

The Sun is a celestial object in the center of our Solar System. I've tried
reading the Sun, but it hurts my eyes.

Tom

Unless some form of FTL travel turns out to be both possible and
practical, then we can assume there would be no human presence much
beyond 60,000 light years at such time.


If FTL travel is possible, you can forget about colonizing distant planets,
Earth's own past is more hospitable to humans and by going faster than the
speed of light, you can also go back in time.

Tom

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 14:43:47 GMT, h (Rand
Simberg) wrote:

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 10:30:44 GMT, in a place far, far away,
(Christopher) made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

Stop being an idiot by stop getting your space information out of dumb
newspapers.

The Daily Mail isn't a dumb newspaper.

laughing

No, it just prints dumb stuff, and some people are dumb enough to
believe it.

Its a better newspaper then The Sun.

So? Who was defending the Sun?

Do you ever have anything relevant to say about anything?

No, I just like winding you up.


Christopher
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Kites rise highest against
the wind - not with it."
Winston Churchill

It's not obvious that you would, and even if you did, I'm sure I
don't have to point out the causalty problems. (Unless you believe such
things create alternate universes...and I do, but that's a whole other
issue.)

Einstein's theory of Relativity implies that objects traveling faster than
light will appear to some objects traveling slower than light to be time
reversed.
Time travel does imply parallel universes, because that is the only way you can
change something that has already happened. History does not contain any
records or evidence of any time travelers from the future. Any alteration in
the history that we know will create an alternate history that is not our own.
Wormholes are the best sorts of time machines. You can accelerate one end while
keeping the other end stationary, creating a wormhole that leads to a possible
future. You can travel through that worm hole to that future and then travel
back to the present. the future and the present become separate universes, and
events that occur in the present after the wormhole's creation won't appear in
the past of the future that the wormhole connects to. Anything else will create
time paradoxes and be logically impossible.

Tom

G EddieA95 wrote:

change something that has already happened. History does not contain any
records or evidence of any time travelers from the future.

Weak argument in itself, because any such travellers would meticulously
disguise their time-status in order not to screw up their own "heritage." IOW,
do you really think someone would appear in strange garb telling people, Hello,
I'm from 2492 AD?"

This all relies heavily on *all* time travelers being extremely and
successfully careful. What happens if even *one* slips up? (And hisory,
being chaotic in nature, you can easily get masively diffrent outcomes
by very small changes. For example, Greg Benford's 'Timescape' involves
a signal to the past creating a chain of events that causes someone to
happen to venture up to the book depository floor that Lee Harvey Oswald
was preparing himself on...

Time travellers are. IMO, as likely as alien visitors, that goes double if
they appear to be human (there is no way aliens would have bodies like ours).
Of course, I don't believe in either.

And similarly, those who believe that UFO's may be extraterrestrial
spacecraft need to ask themselves:

1. Considering our own present-day stealth technology, why is it that
someone capable of interstellar travel lets their ships be seen *at
all?* And...

2. How many such visitors can we have, before even *one* of them
experiences a highly-visible malfunction, or even *one* of their people
says something to the effect of: "Damn the Prime Directive, I'm gonna
make open contact with them!"

On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 05:42:03 GMT, Joann Evans
wrote:

Christopher wrote:

[snip]

Do you ever have anything relevant to say about anything?

No, I just like winding you up.

Honesty. Refreshing.

One trys ones best.



Christopher
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Kites rise highest against
the wind - not with it."
Winston Churchill