Ok, right as I hit submit, I realized I've read the original post wrong, but my point still stands. There exists no means to safely accelerate a spacecraft to the speeds required to travel 100,000 ly in 3 minutes subjective time.
It's only 25 light years away. If solar sails can be asumed to go "a significant fraction" of light speed (at their best) we can assume that it would take no longer than a few minutes - to the passengers (assuming that a trip of 100,000 light years would take about 3 minutes "to the riders").
You've forgotten about acceleration. Accelerating to 99.9% of light speed (relative to the Sun) in 90 seconds would require an acceleration of about 340,000g. Solar sails don't have that kind of thrust, and you couldn't build a ship or crew to survive it anyway.
(Note that I've done the math using newtonian equations. With relativistic effects the number is bound to be much worse).
There is a very sound reason to put Arabic numerals in the word, it's easy to pick out no matter what language(s) you read. This isn't anything like Prince's name where he just made up a totally new symbol to get out of contract obligations.
Our civilization relies on mostly verbal (not visual) communication. Prince's new symbol wasn't adapted for our media at all, especially since he didn't even bother to give it a name or pronunciation. None of this is true for "i18n".
I don't consider "I-eighteen-n" to be much more pronouncable than "The artist formerly known as Prince". Hell, "internationalization" isn't very pronouncable either. Eight syllables in one word is too many.
i18n may not be a good abbreviation. However can you come up with a way to represent the concept to all 6+billion people on earth?
The grandparent poster complains about 'i18n' being a lousy abbreviation, and you give the world a six paragraph rant about cultural imperialism. This is rather like going off on communism because someone commented on the color of an object.
Seriously, it has numbers in it. Numbers!
(at this point, I start wanting to scream 'Those aren't even WORDS!!!! ED! ED! ED IS THE STANDARD!!!')
By your own logic, you must be incredibly dumb. What proof was there before bullets?
Before supersonic bullets, the question of whether supersonic flight was probably unanswerable. There was no evidence that one could travel faster than sound, and I doubt that fluid dynamics was developed to the point where it could offer a theory of what would happen. On the other hand, and the part you seem to be missing, is that they did not know that it was impossible either.
A major part of scientific progress is recognizing what one does not know. The problem with FTL travel is not that we do not know how to do it. The problem is that our current understanding of physics says it is impossible.
People like you are exactly what's wrong with the world.
Big words for someone who won't even rise to the level of pseudonymity.
Always going on about what can't be done.
And that's exactly what I did not say.
peragrin's original argument was absurd. "X was deemed impossible, and we did it. Therefore Y, which is also stated to be impossible, must be possible as well." I was pointing out that X was never truly believed impossible. It is the difference between not knowing how to do something, and knowing something cannot be done.
100 years ago Flight was quite literally a dream for 99.99999999% of the world.
And flight was known to be physically possible by anyone who had seen birds or insects fly.
For 50 years one thought they couldn't travel faster than sound.
Only the stupid ones thought it was actually impossible. Rifle bullets had been supersonic since the 19th century.
in the Late 1970's IBM asked would an home person want a computer.
By the late 1970s, this ridiculous example had been reduced to a problem of business and software development. There's not even a perceived physical impossibility involved.
Um, you just said the equivalent of "You're wrong, and here's some extra information about what you posted."
I never said you were wrong about where they did the cutting, or why they chose to chop at that point. I said you were wrong about the motivation for the code in the first place. They didn't put the code in for hugs and bunnies from people using 80 column text browsers.
Actualy, that/is/ the fixed version. They chop up (almost) everything that's longer than a certain length so us poor 80-columners can read the site without having to scroll sideways.
No, they chop it up because there were jackasses who would intentionally post things that widened the page to a ridiculous degree, breaking line wrapping.
This new technology incorporates the same kinds of drugs, but makes cancer cells more likely to absorb the drug, making it even more biased towards killing off cancer cells. Normal cells will absorb at a slower rate and will still be largely unaffected unless they are dividing. Cancer cells will absorb more, and be hit harder by the drug.
I realize this has been adequately explained already, but I've come up with an insane analogy, and can't resist.
Suppose it takes 10 units of poison to kill a Muppet. Suppose further that Cookie Monster is the target (cancer).
In conventional chemotherapy, we have the equivalent of injecting 1 unit of poison into each of a pile of carrots. We then walk down Sesame Street with the carrots. Bert and Ernie (normal cells) each eat a carrot, ingesting 1 unit of poison. Cookie Monster, being a glutton beyond just cookies, eats 3. In order to kill Cookie Monster, we have to repeat 4 times. This has the disadvantage of getting Bert and Ernie up to 40% of the lethal dose, which is going to make them quite sick.
As described, this new approach bakes the poison into cookies. Now Bert and Ernie each get a cookie and 1 unit of poison, but Cookie Monster scarfs the remaining cookies, and quickly keels over. Thus the target is eliminated, and the effects on bystanders are reduced.
The numbers are completely made up, Muppets can't eat, and Cookie Monster never actually gets the cookies in his mouth anyway.
Nonstick cookware, with polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) coating, can also emit fumes harmful to birds, if cookware is accidentally heated to high temperatures, exceeding approximately 500F (260C) -- well above the temperatures needed for frying or baking. In addition, PTFE coated drip pans should be avoided because even in normal use they reach extremely high temperatures and can emit fumes that are hazardous to birds.
500F is a bit outside most normal cooking temperatures, but not impossible to produce in the average kitchen. A broiler will do so easily, and so can your range if you let it. For example, I would never consider making a dark cajun roux in a non-stick pan.
Take the opening scene of III -- a technically impressive space battle, but one that is totally uninspiring. It is introduced with some text, but what ships are whose? Why the hell is there a batttle being fought? Whose ships are whose? It's so chaotic it's hard to relate to.
I think the major problem there is that the Clone Wars cartoons set that all up, and Lucas thought he didn't need to really explain it in the movie.
The early Hubble pictures suffered from optical distortion due to a miscalculation on what the shape of the mirror would be in obit, and NASA also fixed that problem using digital image filtering techniques to reconstruct a clear image. The key was that they had a precise model of the distortion and that it was invertible.
While there may have been an issue with that (which I've never heard of), the infamous Hubble mirror problem was that Perkin-Elmer built the mirror wrong due to a flawed instrument, and ignored the other instruments that were telling them it wasn't the right shape.
Actually, I believe my exact words at the time were: "Okay, that's it, we have to give it away..."
Wife: "The whole CD changer?"
Me: "Hell no, the kid. I might be able to fix the changer, but the kid's obviously broken."
In the old Mac game, Avara, you pilot your flat shaded mech around blasting things, and you could launch a tiny helicopter remote to give you a better view.
There was also a glitch where if there was a ramp slanting into the ground, you could use it to push the mech entirely underground. Multiple jump keys could also be used (with proper timing) to increase jump height.
By copying music and movies and sharing these files, We, the people, are simply asserting our rights when faced with a corrupt and racketeering organization. Which in this case are entertainment companies who have stolen the public domain.
If you want to retain the moral high ground, you must only traffic in materials that should be public domain, but are not due to extensions. Even under pre-extension copyright rules, the latest three Star Wars films, for example, would still be protected by copyright.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, right as I hit submit, I realized I've read the original post wrong, but my point still stands. There exists no means to safely accelerate a spacecraft to the speeds required to travel 100,000 ly in 3 minutes subjective time.
You've forgotten about acceleration. Accelerating to 99.9% of light speed (relative to the Sun) in 90 seconds would require an acceleration of about 340,000g. Solar sails don't have that kind of thrust, and you couldn't build a ship or crew to survive it anyway.
(Note that I've done the math using newtonian equations. With relativistic effects the number is bound to be much worse).
Except for the whole unpronouncable symbol thing.
I don't consider "I-eighteen-n" to be much more pronouncable than "The artist formerly known as Prince". Hell, "internationalization" isn't very pronouncable either. Eight syllables in one word is too many.
That unpronouncable symbol Prince changed his name to was easily recognizable too, but that doesn't mean it served well as a name.
Post holer...digging holes for posts.
The grandparent poster complains about 'i18n' being a lousy abbreviation, and you give the world a six paragraph rant about cultural imperialism. This is rather like going off on communism because someone commented on the color of an object.
Seriously, it has numbers in it. Numbers!
(at this point, I start wanting to scream 'Those aren't even WORDS!!!! ED! ED! ED IS THE STANDARD!!!')
You mean in 2187, Slashdot's HTML will actually meet a standard!?
Before supersonic bullets, the question of whether supersonic flight was probably unanswerable. There was no evidence that one could travel faster than sound, and I doubt that fluid dynamics was developed to the point where it could offer a theory of what would happen. On the other hand, and the part you seem to be missing, is that they did not know that it was impossible either.
A major part of scientific progress is recognizing what one does not know. The problem with FTL travel is not that we do not know how to do it. The problem is that our current understanding of physics says it is impossible.
Big words for someone who won't even rise to the level of pseudonymity.
And that's exactly what I did not say.
peragrin's original argument was absurd. "X was deemed impossible, and we did it. Therefore Y, which is also stated to be impossible, must be possible as well." I was pointing out that X was never truly believed impossible. It is the difference between not knowing how to do something, and knowing something cannot be done.
And flight was known to be physically possible by anyone who had seen birds or insects fly.
Only the stupid ones thought it was actually impossible. Rifle bullets had been supersonic since the 19th century.
By the late 1970s, this ridiculous example had been reduced to a problem of business and software development. There's not even a perceived physical impossibility involved.
Not exactly.
I never said you were wrong about where they did the cutting, or why they chose to chop at that point. I said you were wrong about the motivation for the code in the first place. They didn't put the code in for hugs and bunnies from people using 80 column text browsers.
No, they chop it up because there were jackasses who would intentionally post things that widened the page to a ridiculous degree, breaking line wrapping.
In the new radio shows, "digital watches" has been changed to "novelty ring tones". Humanity is even more doomed than you thought.
Answering that would first require the development of nanocookie technology.
I realize this has been adequately explained already, but I've come up with an insane analogy, and can't resist.
Suppose it takes 10 units of poison to kill a Muppet. Suppose further that Cookie Monster is the target (cancer).
In conventional chemotherapy, we have the equivalent of injecting 1 unit of poison into each of a pile of carrots. We then walk down Sesame Street with the carrots. Bert and Ernie (normal cells) each eat a carrot, ingesting 1 unit of poison. Cookie Monster, being a glutton beyond just cookies, eats 3. In order to kill Cookie Monster, we have to repeat 4 times. This has the disadvantage of getting Bert and Ernie up to 40% of the lethal dose, which is going to make them quite sick.
As described, this new approach bakes the poison into cookies. Now Bert and Ernie each get a cookie and 1 unit of poison, but Cookie Monster scarfs the remaining cookies, and quickly keels over. Thus the target is eliminated, and the effects on bystanders are reduced.
The numbers are completely made up, Muppets can't eat, and Cookie Monster never actually gets the cookies in his mouth anyway.
James Burke you ain't.
This link on teflon.com posted by someone else.
500F is a bit outside most normal cooking temperatures, but not impossible to produce in the average kitchen. A broiler will do so easily, and so can your range if you let it. For example, I would never consider making a dark cajun roux in a non-stick pan.
(obligatory) Duke Nukem Forever?
I think the major problem there is that the Clone Wars cartoons set that all up, and Lucas thought he didn't need to really explain it in the movie.
While there may have been an issue with that (which I've never heard of), the infamous Hubble mirror problem was that Perkin-Elmer built the mirror wrong due to a flawed instrument, and ignored the other instruments that were telling them it wasn't the right shape.
"We will rule over all this land, and we will call it... 'Camelot'."
"I fart in your general direction. You mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries. Ha ha HA! Mine is an evil laugh..."
Are you familiar with the work of Jeff Vogel?
There was also a glitch where if there was a ramp slanting into the ground, you could use it to push the mech entirely underground. Multiple jump keys could also be used (with proper timing) to increase jump height.
If you want to retain the moral high ground, you must only traffic in materials that should be public domain, but are not due to extensions. Even under pre-extension copyright rules, the latest three Star Wars films, for example, would still be protected by copyright.