You've already made it abundantly clear that you've no idea what you're talking about, and I quote you directly, "Dark matter does not seem to form "structures" of any size." and are either unwilling or unable to grasp what I'm talking about, so stop wasting my time.
How would you know, you've already made two entirely false assertions, the first is the structure one, the second, well I'll quote another poster below: "No, dark matter contains more baggage than just embodying the discrepancy in galaxy rotation shear. For one thing, the title dark matter presumes that it is, in fact, matter. This is a different hypothesis than various modifications of gravitational force theories (which are not tenable now).". And this is aside from your misuderstanding about the relative velocities of stars, which I'll chalk up to me just not explaining the idea fully.
Yes but in the absence of a perfect 1:1 propulsion system using reaction mass, or anything even close to it, the question is could this possibly offer advantages. Of course the stars have relative velocities as well so any putative link between them would also have to be in motion.
The parent post is a prime example of the kind of dunce that is more of a threat to scientific advancement than any creationist. If it doesn't already exist or is unlikely to happen in his lifetime, it's wild fantasy which no right thinking folk should countenance. He'd have run Jules Verne out of town on a rail to appease his insecurities. Imagination is a primary ingredient in the development of our species.
Maybe you missed this bit: "The question I'm asking is would dark matter offer advantages in this regard". If it can be generated or laid down in a way that is more efficient than blasting reaction mass out the back end of a spaceship, which wouldn't be difficult, it's worth consideration. Keep in mind I'm not making assertions here.
If it can, it would be at the expense of incredible amounts of energy, and the mass of the equipment and fuel required to generate the energy would probably outweigh the generated dark matter by billions of times. No free lunches in this universe.
How do you know it would require incredible amounts of energy to generate dark matter? We aren't even sure what it is.
Thanks, that's very useful. I'll make sure there's a wikipedia entry for every comment I make henceforth and not throw out blue sky ideas for discussion among the interested.
Dark matter doesn't clump the way normal matter does (clumping requires friction, which is a very non-dark process): there's no obvious way to grab or move a bunch of it around. Think diffuse cloud of non-interacting particles.
Surely it can be created though, even if it can't be moved it should be something we can make, eventually. I'm obviously not settled on any of the details, just casting a net and seeing what flops up on deck. Stations generating a stream of the stuff off to the side? More practical than trying to catch antimatter pellets at near relativistic speeds, even if the energy needed to get refuelling lumps to that velocity didn't make the effort pointless.
The stars themselves are moving, if you wanted to build a connecting chain it would have to similarly move. The question I'm asking is would dark matter offer advantages in this regard... maybe a highway isn't the best description, a river perhaps?
You don't want a giant lump of gravity at either end, you want a trail of breadcrumbs between A and B. As for energy expended, while you're talking about an incorrect understanding of what I'm saying, a highway construction crew uses many times more energy and time than a car, but it makes the car's journey a lot more energy efficient, and there are dozens of orders of magnitude more cars on highways than there ever were construction crews.
You'd have to expend energy anyway, rocket propulsion technologies of various sorts are pretty much laying down the highway in front of the car as they go, and ripping it up after themselves. While a highway construction crew might be a lot slower and more energy intensive than a car, they only do the job once and make it easier for all the cars that come after them.
What I'm wondering is, would the nature of dark matter lend advantages over any other material in terms of highway construction.
I'd rather move all that matter and equipment once to lay a trail than do it every time, even antimatter produces brutally poor returns over those kinds of distances.
It has to have a process of creation, by the time we get to the stage of seriously contemplating interstellar voyages perhaps we will know how to make it, in the same way we can generate x-rays and similar.
So if I have this right and someone please correct me if I don't, dark matter is transparent, we can see right through it, it's intangible and doesn't appear to interact with normal matter except through gravitational effects. Could such a thing be used to make some sort of dark matter highway to provide a gravity well between stars for ships to travel down without expending much energy?
Rozeboom doesn't make a good showing at all I have to say, Randi is talking about how he wants to go while working and oprah drops the "well an interview is kind of work, so there you go, dream come true" clanger. I mean what?
Take off the wings, head, legs and identifiable bits like you do with any other animal and poof, delicious food. Better for you than most other foods as well, high in protein. Shrimps are more or less the same thing.
Doesn't hold water, some of the better zombie movies were made when republicans were in power, like the new version of Dawn of the Dead, or the early Resident Evils. Zombies have an enduring appeal because it works with on different levels for different people. Some see them as just good scares, some see them as survivalist fantasy, some the strategic and tactical elements, some as social satire, others as tense psychological thrillers, it's a multifaceted form of entertainment.
I'm upset to hear about this, his book "Use of Weapons" was inspired, head and shoulders above the usual fiction mill derivatives. Talent for creation is rare, and the world will be a lesser place without Ian. Get better!
Convergence is the future, apps and sites that work on any platform. Efforts like Bootstrap which for most projects are taking a mallet to a mosquito are nonetheless a sign of things to come. Apps don't have the ability in and of themselves to store a whole lot of data, nor should they, but bigger iron does, and if you can access and manipulate data from one device you should be able to do it from another in the same way.
I'm very excited about the peer to peer developments in browsers as well as webGL, for gaming this opens up stunning new horizons, it's only a matter of time before that hits the mobile space as well, and I'm mildly amused by stories of VCs unable to buy small gaming shops because they are just too profitable - the long and the short of it is, when the money men get involved, a bubble is sure to appear. That they can't get a foot in the door means job security and satisfaction for all. Pump and dump are the watchwords of the vulture capitalist, their frustration is everyone else's gain.
But to cut a medium sized ramble short, breadth of skills will be more important than depth for many jobs in the near future, and I don't think we're in an app bubble.
If I'm anywhere near as sharp and coherent as he is at age 84 I won't be complaining I tell you. Or rather I probably will be, but sharply and coherently.
Slashdot Mirror
You've already made it abundantly clear that you've no idea what you're talking about, and I quote you directly, "Dark matter does not seem to form "structures" of any size." and are either unwilling or unable to grasp what I'm talking about, so stop wasting my time.
It's fairly uncertain that dark matter even is matter.
How would you know, you've already made two entirely false assertions, the first is the structure one, the second, well I'll quote another poster below: "No, dark matter contains more baggage than just embodying the discrepancy in galaxy rotation shear. For one thing, the title dark matter presumes that it is, in fact, matter. This is a different hypothesis than various modifications of gravitational force theories (which are not tenable now).". And this is aside from your misuderstanding about the relative velocities of stars, which I'll chalk up to me just not explaining the idea fully.
Eh, yes it does. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter#Structure_formation There's even a nice picture of the dark matter structures.
Yes but in the absence of a perfect 1:1 propulsion system using reaction mass, or anything even close to it, the question is could this possibly offer advantages. Of course the stars have relative velocities as well so any putative link between them would also have to be in motion.
The parent post is a prime example of the kind of dunce that is more of a threat to scientific advancement than any creationist. If it doesn't already exist or is unlikely to happen in his lifetime, it's wild fantasy which no right thinking folk should countenance. He'd have run Jules Verne out of town on a rail to appease his insecurities. Imagination is a primary ingredient in the development of our species.
Maybe you missed this bit: "The question I'm asking is would dark matter offer advantages in this regard". If it can be generated or laid down in a way that is more efficient than blasting reaction mass out the back end of a spaceship, which wouldn't be difficult, it's worth consideration. Keep in mind I'm not making assertions here.
If it can, it would be at the expense of incredible amounts of energy, and the mass of the equipment and fuel required to generate the energy would probably outweigh the generated dark matter by billions of times. No free lunches in this universe.
How do you know it would require incredible amounts of energy to generate dark matter? We aren't even sure what it is.
Thanks, that's very useful. I'll make sure there's a wikipedia entry for every comment I make henceforth and not throw out blue sky ideas for discussion among the interested.
Dark matter doesn't clump the way normal matter does (clumping requires friction, which is a very non-dark process): there's no obvious way to grab or move a bunch of it around. Think diffuse cloud of non-interacting particles.
Surely it can be created though, even if it can't be moved it should be something we can make, eventually. I'm obviously not settled on any of the details, just casting a net and seeing what flops up on deck. Stations generating a stream of the stuff off to the side? More practical than trying to catch antimatter pellets at near relativistic speeds, even if the energy needed to get refuelling lumps to that velocity didn't make the effort pointless.
By all means point me in the direction of a better description of dark matter then.
The stars themselves are moving, if you wanted to build a connecting chain it would have to similarly move. The question I'm asking is would dark matter offer advantages in this regard... maybe a highway isn't the best description, a river perhaps?
Your highway would have to be incredibly dense.
Or very very long, which handily enough describes the distances between the stars quite nicely.
Once again, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_assist
You don't want a giant lump of gravity at either end, you want a trail of breadcrumbs between A and B. As for energy expended, while you're talking about an incorrect understanding of what I'm saying, a highway construction crew uses many times more energy and time than a car, but it makes the car's journey a lot more energy efficient, and there are dozens of orders of magnitude more cars on highways than there ever were construction crews.
You'd have to expend energy anyway, rocket propulsion technologies of various sorts are pretty much laying down the highway in front of the car as they go, and ripping it up after themselves. While a highway construction crew might be a lot slower and more energy intensive than a car, they only do the job once and make it easier for all the cars that come after them.
What I'm wondering is, would the nature of dark matter lend advantages over any other material in terms of highway construction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_assist
I'd rather move all that matter and equipment once to lay a trail than do it every time, even antimatter produces brutally poor returns over those kinds of distances.
Shovel it off the back of a flatbed, obviously.
It has to have a process of creation, by the time we get to the stage of seriously contemplating interstellar voyages perhaps we will know how to make it, in the same way we can generate x-rays and similar.
So if I have this right and someone please correct me if I don't, dark matter is transparent, we can see right through it, it's intangible and doesn't appear to interact with normal matter except through gravitational effects. Could such a thing be used to make some sort of dark matter highway to provide a gravity well between stars for ships to travel down without expending much energy?
Rozeboom doesn't make a good showing at all I have to say, Randi is talking about how he wants to go while working and oprah drops the "well an interview is kind of work, so there you go, dream come true" clanger. I mean what?
Ha, shrinking violets, you probably eat more insects than this on a monthly basis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Food_Defect_Action_Levels
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entomophagy#Unintentional_ingestion
Take off the wings, head, legs and identifiable bits like you do with any other animal and poof, delicious food. Better for you than most other foods as well, high in protein. Shrimps are more or less the same thing.
Doesn't hold water, some of the better zombie movies were made when republicans were in power, like the new version of Dawn of the Dead, or the early Resident Evils. Zombies have an enduring appeal because it works with on different levels for different people. Some see them as just good scares, some see them as survivalist fantasy, some the strategic and tactical elements, some as social satire, others as tense psychological thrillers, it's a multifaceted form of entertainment.
I'm upset to hear about this, his book "Use of Weapons" was inspired, head and shoulders above the usual fiction mill derivatives. Talent for creation is rare, and the world will be a lesser place without Ian. Get better!
Convergence is the future, apps and sites that work on any platform. Efforts like Bootstrap which for most projects are taking a mallet to a mosquito are nonetheless a sign of things to come. Apps don't have the ability in and of themselves to store a whole lot of data, nor should they, but bigger iron does, and if you can access and manipulate data from one device you should be able to do it from another in the same way.
I'm very excited about the peer to peer developments in browsers as well as webGL, for gaming this opens up stunning new horizons, it's only a matter of time before that hits the mobile space as well, and I'm mildly amused by stories of VCs unable to buy small gaming shops because they are just too profitable - the long and the short of it is, when the money men get involved, a bubble is sure to appear. That they can't get a foot in the door means job security and satisfaction for all. Pump and dump are the watchwords of the vulture capitalist, their frustration is everyone else's gain.
But to cut a medium sized ramble short, breadth of skills will be more important than depth for many jobs in the near future, and I don't think we're in an app bubble.
If I'm anywhere near as sharp and coherent as he is at age 84 I won't be complaining I tell you. Or rather I probably will be, but sharply and coherently.
My understanding is that the bulk of the money is spent on marketing and sales.