Slashdot Mirror

Duncan Lunan from ASTRA wrote a couple of books on the subject in the early 1970s and basically fleshed out the possibilities you outlined, going through various permutations, including ones where we initiate contact, either inside our own solar system or outside. It was an interesting read but don't know if the books are accessible on the web yet.

http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~len/boog/gifs/ag500. jpg

It used a chord keyboard exactly like the one outlined, although it was burdened with alphabet keys also because they wanted to appeal to everybody. I seem to remember hitting 30 WPM on this thing without any kind of predictive text input. Really good kit.

(Well, at least there's one person who remembers the MC5. Or you're with the KLF helping Hagbard battle the Illuminati... Conspiracies, conspiracies!)

• Waverider theory
  
• More Waverider theory
  
• My God, Hardware! - the experience of a Scottish Astronautics research group (I suggest reading the whole piece, the link points to the middle of the story, 'cos of the great quote!)
  

The NASA design is example 4 on the summary page and is quoted there as having a theoretical top speed of Mach 20.

The BBC has some good pics and information too.

This whole argument that's tied in with many people's need to divide things into discrete groups, even if such groups don't exist, strikes me as more than a bit childish. We already know what it is, who cares how it's categorised? Let's just get on with learning more about it.

Richard Feynman had some great things to say about this on a BBC Horizon documentary some time ago. You can attach names to things as much as you like, but having a name for it doesn't compare with actually understanding it.

sorry that cuba link was broken - here it is: cuba

But more relevant to the "instantly familiar" part is that when the New Left radicals started to idolize him, this one image of his face began to appear over and over on posters, t-shirts, magazine covers, everywhere, all variations of this one picture of him. It became a ubiquitous bit of pop-art for several years, and for probably 10 years or so, just about anybody in the U.S. could have seen a rendition of that one image, and known it was Che.

And it showed up in about a million different variations -- and apparently some of them are still around.

A viable alternative to the shuttle was on the drawing board as far back as the late 1980s. HOTOL (Horizontal Take-Off and Landing), similar in appearance to current generation supersonic aircraft was designed by British rocket veteran Alan Bond.

Unfortunately, as soon as Bond had designed the revolutionary air-breathing engine that the project was based on, it was classified by the British government. Score one for stupid politics. So, perhaps the best rocketry engine designed never got built.

Later, HOTOL variants and derivatives were proposed, including an Anglo-Russian project called Interim HOTOL.

Here are a few related links to check out, most of which contain illustrations of what the orbiter would have looked like:

HOTOL
HOTOL and Interim HOTOL
Wikipedia entry for HOTOL

Google search for "HOTOL"

Of course, HOTOL and HOTOL-derived orbiters are still a viable alternative today. Air-breathing engines seem to be the logical next step.

Just to confuse things a bit more ;) - would it surprise you lot to hear that the first powered plane flew in England in 1848? (see this page)

The Wright brothers may have been the first to manage MANNED flight on a powered plane, and that's a huge achievement, but it does bug me a little when people claim they produced the first powered plane.

Depends on what you call a plane and what you call fly.

Charles Parsons (England) let a small 100m "fly" before it crashed. It was driven by a steam engine.

Sir George Cayley let a small glider fly, which carried a boy (1853).

Or, following your link a bit further,
John Stringfellow should be considered the first pilot (1848).

"It Steam-engines come steam-engine time." . There are only so many right ways to do things. Not every design that looks identical is a copy.

Yes, it IS American policy to brook no competition. Can't blame them for that, just make sure that they don't get away with it.

BTW it would be a good idea for the benefit of lurkers to give some links to the subjects under discussion. For example, the X-30 also here looks rather like the German "Saenger" rather than a HOTOL.

Mind:Brain::Software:Computer is too simplistic and has many explanatory problems and logical inconsistencies. See http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~ursa/philos/phinow2. htm for specifics. This theory has been kicked around for decades, and they still haven't been able to patch up all the holes.

That's weird that you missed the Tomorrow People reference then! (I'm not familiar with the show myself, just thought the song was rather appropriate!)

:)

Jason

Quote from UCE: "Under U.S. Law (Bill s.1618 Title III passed by the 105th U.S. Congress) you are prohibited from considering this mail Spam because we include contact information and a link for removal from our mailing list.

Hilarious. Bill s.1618 was never passed into law. Here is the first thing Google popped up with when searching for it. Make sure you mention this when writing to the spammer's ISP to get their account yanked.

The bill was never passed by the U.S. Congress:

U.S. Senate Bill 1618, an Anti-slamming Amendments Act, contained a Section 301, relating to transmissions of unsolicited commercial electronic mail. S.1618 was approved by the U.S. Senate on May 12, 1998. It was then referred to the House Committee on Commerce on October 21, 1998. The Bill DIED in committee and was never passed into law by the 105th Congress. Nor has the 106th Congress passed anything similar at this time.

-- http://www.d-pendablelibrary.com/reinboldcongress. htm

More information on the bill:

http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~gcaselton/spam/bill- s1618.html

Google Search

Also: DON'T REPLY TO THE SPAMMERS "REMOVE" ADDRESSES. "Remove" addresses are almost always just a drop box to confirm the validity of your email address so they know whom to spam next time.

...I am the Raxis.

You can read more about John Harrison here.

Anyhow, to make a long story short, I found it interesting that the British government required him to explain the workings of H4 to a panel of scientists (etc) in order to pass the knowledge of how it worked on to the public.

The article I've quoted mentions that his endowment made him the first recepient of a government research grant -- and the government had the sense to make sure he published the inner workings before paying him.

--

I remember reading about someone elses idea for an electromagnetic thruster here

I have *no* idea if this is physically possible (or even if the website is serious :)

The ZX81 Support Page has more info about that machine. See also entries in the Open Directory and the Google Web Directory.

was that the top down one where you rotated the screen and the ship stayed still so your bullets curved away from you as you auto-fired

was that the top down one where you rotated the screen and the ship stayed still so your bullets curved away from you as you auto-fired

Roton
Space planes (X-33)
SSTO articles
HOTOL

If you really think that the SAS will never be used to assassinate civilians you should read that

• Operation Flavius
• MURDER ON THE ROCK
• http://www.irishnews.com/k_a rchive/040398/nnews15.html

Where the SAS shot unarmed supposed IRA operatives in Spain, but for that matter unarmed civilian, without even trying to arrest them. (And got away with it...)

I wound up going to the movie with my four year old son because of a traffic jam. I chose the movie because of the PG rating. You surely can slam on this movie for technical reasons but it has to be the first Sci-Fi in a long time that doesn't revolve around gratuitous violence or focus on the negative aspects of human nature.

There were only two scenes where I had to cover his eyes. The scene in the beginning where one guy gets a rock in the face and another gets ripped apart and the freeze dried guy near the middle.

If aliens watched this move they would garner that humans are decent, courageous people who care about each other and strive for greatness. The whole movie is a message of hope and a reflection of our own wishes to find we are not alone in the universe. The cinematography it reminded me a little of " Robinson Crusoe on Mars".

But it didn't have a cryptic meaning or a French tragic ending or a "to be continued" so the critics don't feel satisfied. The techie nitpickers didn't get to see all of the true boredom of day to day life on a spaceship or on Mars so they aren't happy. Meanwhile I walked away from two hours of enjoyment with my son that hopefully showed him a little of the wonderment I feel about space travel and exploration. I guess with $40 in ticket sales the first weekend a few others maybe agreed.