It's a thought experiment but it's not totally inconceivable. There were plans for spacecraft not so far removed from this idea drawn up in the 70's. Technically they're possible but practically they're too expensive!
Anyway, the point is that the asymptotic approach to the speed of light with a constant acceleration, or even with a constant force, produces results that boggle the mind.
The Lorentz factor at 2c/3 is only 1.34, at 99.97c/100 it's ~40. At 99.9997c/100 it's ~400. Not as large as you'd think for being within 0.0003% of c.
And think... to go from 99.9997% of c to 99.9999997% only requires an increase in velocity of 1000m/s, 100 seconds under 1g at rest mass. Through this velocity your Lorentz factor mean is ~7000, so it'd take a mere 700000 seconds. A mere 8 days or so, during which nearly a thousand years passes on earth.
Indeed. And as the great Carl Sagan pointed out in Cosmos it would only take a device accelerating at a constant 1g to be able to travel to and return from the Andromeda Galaxy in a human lifetime. Only problem... about 3 million years would have passed on earth.
A quick back of an envelope calculation shows that at 1g you would reach relativistic speeds inside 4 years with that acceleration. Of course you have to decelerate for half the journey. So 8 years 'wasted' but the rest of the journey experiences significant time dilation. And the longer the journey the more extreme the time dilation. Travelling to the centre of the galaxy and back would take a relatively huge one-third of the time of the journey to Andromeda for the voyager, but a mere 1% of the time would have passed back on Earth.
*All numbers subject to change due to memory loss or changes to the rules of Physics.
Wouldn't be too sure about the looseness of the Federal Reserve considering the Federal Deficit is running around $5 trillion and the total Federal obligations lie around $55 trillion. Quite an amusing write-up on that here.
A close friend of mine actually sells solar panels for a living, so I know from him that the economics talked about here are wrong. Unless you live somewhere with a significant amount of strong sunlight a solar panel, at today's costs and efficiencies, will never pay for itself. For example the whole of Europe. If you lived in southern AZ or CA you might possibly get your money back in 15 years. However unless you live very close to the Equator then to get a system that provides a good amount of power throughout the day then you need a motorised panel and software to control it. This doubles the cost of the installation but may double the output of the panel.
They are a great idea and future improvements in efficiencies will help, but don't expect them to pay for themselves in under 10 years even in ideal situations and potentially never pay for themselves if less than ideal environments. Batteries don't last forever either and you need batteries, transformers and all sorts of electronic gizmo's that I don't know about to make the power useable, useful and storeable.
I expect a massive uptake of them soon though. After all Double Glazing takes 20 years to pay for itself too. It's just about marketing now.
The ADS shoots a beam of millimeters waves, which are longer in wavelength than x-rays but shorter than microwaves
That is just a hopeless display of lack of knowledge of the EM Spectrum... somewhere between x-rays and microwaves! So what happened to ultraviolet, visible and infra-red?
This wavelength is in the 'microwave' part of the spectrum, somewhat near the Infrared. The reason, for those that don't know, that microwaves work is that the frequency of the wave is that of the harmonic resonance of the water molecule. So the question to be asking is what molecules respond to this frequency and what effect could it have to excite that molecule in the body?
I'm afraid that the lack of sources for anything you have claimed or the link you provide claims leads to me to be more than sceptical of any of these claims.
Have you been to the Pyramid and checked these measurements? A single urban myth goes a long way you know...
Where does this idea of a pyramid inch originate?
Why would the pyramid contain shafts that align to various stars over a period of more than 400 years?
So it was aligned perfectly to true north 'at some time'!? Well when exactly? Never is the answer. True north is defined by a fixed point on the Earth's surface, so no fixed object on the earth that does not align with true north could ever have aligned with true north. True north is the direction from yourself to the North Pole - a geographical term. I believe the person that wrote this meant Magnetic North which does indeed change but that is such a huge oversight that it overshadows the rest of the fiction in the article you linked. There is a celestial North Pole, extracted from True North which at times may point directly at a star but this doesn't help the Pyramid to rotate to point at the True North point on the globe.
It smacks of the Bible Code to me. Perhaps you should read Martin Gardener's refutation of that to see how easily one can take a very large amount of data and make it say anything you like.
Yes there are a great many things that are amazing about the Great Pyramid but none that seem insurmountable with vast labour resources, dedication and several decades of work using such simple tools as sand and water and rope.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, Missed a factor of ten. It'd be about 80 days on the craft, 10,000 years on earth.
It's a thought experiment but it's not totally inconceivable. There were plans for spacecraft not so far removed from this idea drawn up in the 70's. Technically they're possible but practically they're too expensive!
Anyway, the point is that the asymptotic approach to the speed of light with a constant acceleration, or even with a constant force, produces results that boggle the mind.
The Lorentz factor at 2c/3 is only 1.34, at 99.97c/100 it's ~40. At 99.9997c/100 it's ~400. Not as large as you'd think for being within 0.0003% of c.
And think... to go from 99.9997% of c to 99.9999997% only requires an increase in velocity of 1000m/s, 100 seconds under 1g at rest mass. Through this velocity your Lorentz factor mean is ~7000, so it'd take a mere 700000 seconds. A mere 8 days or so, during which nearly a thousand years passes on earth.
Indeed. And as the great Carl Sagan pointed out in Cosmos it would only take a device accelerating at a constant 1g to be able to travel to and return from the Andromeda Galaxy in a human lifetime. Only problem... about 3 million years would have passed on earth.
A quick back of an envelope calculation shows that at 1g you would reach relativistic speeds inside 4 years with that acceleration. Of course you have to decelerate for half the journey. So 8 years 'wasted' but the rest of the journey experiences significant time dilation. And the longer the journey the more extreme the time dilation. Travelling to the centre of the galaxy and back would take a relatively huge one-third of the time of the journey to Andromeda for the voyager, but a mere 1% of the time would have passed back on Earth.
*All numbers subject to change due to memory loss or changes to the rules of Physics.
Wouldn't be too sure about the looseness of the Federal Reserve considering the Federal Deficit is running around $5 trillion and the total Federal obligations lie around $55 trillion. Quite an amusing write-up on that here.
A close friend of mine actually sells solar panels for a living, so I know from him that the economics talked about here are wrong. Unless you live somewhere with a significant amount of strong sunlight a solar panel, at today's costs and efficiencies, will never pay for itself. For example the whole of Europe. If you lived in southern AZ or CA you might possibly get your money back in 15 years. However unless you live very close to the Equator then to get a system that provides a good amount of power throughout the day then you need a motorised panel and software to control it. This doubles the cost of the installation but may double the output of the panel.
They are a great idea and future improvements in efficiencies will help, but don't expect them to pay for themselves in under 10 years even in ideal situations and potentially never pay for themselves if less than ideal environments. Batteries don't last forever either and you need batteries, transformers and all sorts of electronic gizmo's that I don't know about to make the power useable, useful and storeable.
I expect a massive uptake of them soon though. After all Double Glazing takes 20 years to pay for itself too. It's just about marketing now.
I'm afraid that the lack of sources for anything you have claimed or the link you provide claims leads to me to be more than sceptical of any of these claims. Have you been to the Pyramid and checked these measurements? A single urban myth goes a long way you know... Where does this idea of a pyramid inch originate? Why would the pyramid contain shafts that align to various stars over a period of more than 400 years? So it was aligned perfectly to true north 'at some time'!? Well when exactly? Never is the answer. True north is defined by a fixed point on the Earth's surface, so no fixed object on the earth that does not align with true north could ever have aligned with true north. True north is the direction from yourself to the North Pole - a geographical term. I believe the person that wrote this meant Magnetic North which does indeed change but that is such a huge oversight that it overshadows the rest of the fiction in the article you linked. There is a celestial North Pole, extracted from True North which at times may point directly at a star but this doesn't help the Pyramid to rotate to point at the True North point on the globe. It smacks of the Bible Code to me. Perhaps you should read Martin Gardener's refutation of that to see how easily one can take a very large amount of data and make it say anything you like. Yes there are a great many things that are amazing about the Great Pyramid but none that seem insurmountable with vast labour resources, dedication and several decades of work using such simple tools as sand and water and rope.