Indeed. It's worth nothing that, relatively speaking, whales are a fairly new evolutionary development. The first whales appear on the scene a mere 50 million years ago. The other question is one of competition. Some astoundingly suboptimal, inefficient designs have survived in nature for millions of years when they lacked significant competition or pressure in their niche. Whales don't seem to face a lot of competition or pressure, even less since we thinned their numbers in recent centuries.
Long story short, whales are unlikely to be anywhere near an optimal solution for their niche, and are unlikely to become one anytime soon.
...due to flaws in the implementation, not the algorithm.
The "flaw in implementation" in most cases being the relatively common "flaw" of being implemented in real-world hardware, where it has to consume power, utilize moving electrical current, obey the laws of physics, etc, rather than existing only on paper where such "flaws" can be avoided.
...if the name MECC takes you on a walk down memory lane...
I wouldn't be at all surprised if there aren't a number of us here for whom it's true that MECC literally changed our lives. I can't even imagine the person I'd be today if it weren't for my exposure to the MECC system thirty years ago. MECC was what got my interested in computers and the idea that they could be more than an isolated game machine, that they could interconnect and be programmed to help share an experience with many other people. MECC was the reason I got my first computer, and insisted that come with a modem, and why I started writing my own BBS software, and... a long chain of events that pretty much define my life, really. I'm sure I'd have many of the same interests anyhow, but the path that I would have followed, the timing and ordering of events that flowed from that... it would be someone else with my name. "There are no little butterflies."
Maybe it's not possible to colonize the galaxy in the way suggested by that approximation, since the stars aren't distributed evenly?
Oh, and, actually, they pretty much are. Spiral arms are optical phenomena due to the locations of the newest and brightest stars (which aren't really likely to have attractive planets for colonization in any case). Sun-like stars are as evenly distributed through the galactic pancake as food coloring is in your purple pancakse after you spend 10 minutes mixing the batter.
Well, if you change the variables a little, it could take longer.
Not significantly longer, geologically speaking. It's an exponential thing. Like the man who asks for one grain of rice the first day, two the second day, four the third day, etc. Change that to weeks, or months, or years, or centuries, and it takes longer for it to equal the entire agriculture output of the empire, but the difference in time isn't significant when talking in the timescale of geological eras, because the exponential nature of the function eventually overwhelms the lengthy delays in getting the ball rolling. If you don't fiddle the variables to the point that it takes any planet a geological age to produce its first colony, the entire galaxy ends up colonized in a timescale smaller than a geological age.
Long trips: Takes a lot of time to get somewhere else. What if we take time out of concerns? Send entire colonies to get somewhere else at a relatively slow speed, and dont care if it takes a hundred years if they could be sleeping, or have enough resources to make it awake.
...ala generation ships. Here's the problem: Anyone who can make a habitat you can live in for that long has mastered the art of living in space. The last thing such a civilization is going to desire, having successfully climbed out of the gravitational hole they were born in, is climb into another one. So, they might visit other stars, but they wouldn't be "sending entire colonies", they'd be sending tourists.
Nice idea, but poor name. Call it an "Instant Micro-Asteroid Field Generator" and you'll be able to sell them much more readily than calling it a "sandcaster". Unfortunately, military clients will begin referring to it by its initials...
Yes, you could fuse that hydrogen/helium exhaust into heavier elements but it won't release as much energy. Basically you'll be adding mass to your spacecraft by putting another engine on but you won't be increasing your thrust as much as you may think.
Perhaps not, depending on what you thought, but it does avoid the problems of trying to run them in parallel, and the fact that the second engine doesn't need a ramscoop may make it's mass negligible compared to the first. Without knowing the engineering specifics, it's impossible to calculate, but it's certainly possible it would be a speed and efficiency win rather than a loss.
So, it's a material difference to the person traveling, but not so material to the observer stationary relative to Alpha Centauri.
Actually, that could make a vast difference to the person watching you from Alpha Centauri. In one case, that person watches you go through 10 weeks worth of food, other consumables, and power to keep you alive during the trip. In the other case, they watch you make the trip and have dinner at your destination, saving a lot of energy by not having to accelerate a ten week supply of food and such for you to use during the trip. At high enough speeds, you can pretty much forgo any kind of life-support, just fling a tin can with enough air in it to last the journey. It's not only a material difference, but one that potentially saves a lot of energy (albeit probably not enough to cover the cost accelerating to the faster rate).
Yes, everyone is saying Facebook is the juggernaut that everyone uses, it can't be dethroned at this point. I can't help but think of the days when Netscape had essentially 100% of the browser market.
OTOH, it was a lot easier for a Netscape user to simply switch browsers than a user embedded in a social network to pull up roots and sink them into a different one. But on the third (gripping) hand, there are steps Google could take to help smooth that transition.
If there's anything I've learned over the years watching technology, it's that if everyone is suddenly climbing aboard a certain technology, it's time to find the next big thing.
I believe this was Microsoft's attitude when the Internet first started taking off.
Rule of thumb: if you're using "begs the question" correctly, you probably don't have to state what question is being begged, since that's implicit. An argument that "begs the question" is circular, so it boils down to "if (something is true), then (something is true)", which, of course, begs the question (the question being, "Well, is (something) true or not?").
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed. It's worth nothing that, relatively speaking, whales are a fairly new evolutionary development. The first whales appear on the scene a mere 50 million years ago. The other question is one of competition. Some astoundingly suboptimal, inefficient designs have survived in nature for millions of years when they lacked significant competition or pressure in their niche. Whales don't seem to face a lot of competition or pressure, even less since we thinned their numbers in recent centuries.
Long story short, whales are unlikely to be anywhere near an optimal solution for their niche, and are unlikely to become one anytime soon.
Even if there is nothing to talk to, humans do talk to themselves sometimes.
Sure... /me backs away slowly.
...due to flaws in the implementation, not the algorithm.
The "flaw in implementation" in most cases being the relatively common "flaw" of being implemented in real-world hardware, where it has to consume power, utilize moving electrical current, obey the laws of physics, etc, rather than existing only on paper where such "flaws" can be avoided.
What do these restrictions have to do with the GPL?
How are they backpedalling?
Nothing, and they aren't. The submitter and/or editor are idiots...
gah... moderation fail, posting to undo...
...if the name MECC takes you on a walk down memory lane...
I wouldn't be at all surprised if there aren't a number of us here for whom it's true that MECC literally changed our lives. I can't even imagine the person I'd be today if it weren't for my exposure to the MECC system thirty years ago. MECC was what got my interested in computers and the idea that they could be more than an isolated game machine, that they could interconnect and be programmed to help share an experience with many other people. MECC was the reason I got my first computer, and insisted that come with a modem, and why I started writing my own BBS software, and... a long chain of events that pretty much define my life, really. I'm sure I'd have many of the same interests anyhow, but the path that I would have followed, the timing and ordering of events that flowed from that... it would be someone else with my name. "There are no little butterflies."
Maybe it's not possible to colonize the galaxy in the way suggested by that approximation, since the stars aren't distributed evenly?
Oh, and, actually, they pretty much are. Spiral arms are optical phenomena due to the locations of the newest and brightest stars (which aren't really likely to have attractive planets for colonization in any case). Sun-like stars are as evenly distributed through the galactic pancake as food coloring is in your purple pancakse after you spend 10 minutes mixing the batter.
Well, if you change the variables a little, it could take longer.
Not significantly longer, geologically speaking. It's an exponential thing. Like the man who asks for one grain of rice the first day, two the second day, four the third day, etc. Change that to weeks, or months, or years, or centuries, and it takes longer for it to equal the entire agriculture output of the empire, but the difference in time isn't significant when talking in the timescale of geological eras, because the exponential nature of the function eventually overwhelms the lengthy delays in getting the ball rolling. If you don't fiddle the variables to the point that it takes any planet a geological age to produce its first colony, the entire galaxy ends up colonized in a timescale smaller than a geological age.
Long trips: Takes a lot of time to get somewhere else. What if we take time out of concerns? Send entire colonies to get somewhere else at a relatively slow speed, and dont care if it takes a hundred years if they could be sleeping, or have enough resources to make it awake.
...ala generation ships. Here's the problem: Anyone who can make a habitat you can live in for that long has mastered the art of living in space. The last thing such a civilization is going to desire, having successfully climbed out of the gravitational hole they were born in, is climb into another one. So, they might visit other stars, but they wouldn't be "sending entire colonies", they'd be sending tourists.
One person's explanation of why something can't be done is another person's catalog of problems to solve in order to do it.
Perhaps you could send a drone or some shiznits way out in front of the ship, emitting the fields, but i'm not sure what's going to protect it.
Another problem solved by recursion!
I believe that fuel source/supply is also a concern. :P
The universe is flinging hydrogen at your with such force people are concerned about you surviving the onslaught, and you can't find a fuel source? XD
There's a little difference between facts and theories. Facts have been tested, theories have not.
Conventional usage is that theories have been tested. If it hasn't been tested, it's not really a theory, it's a hypothesis.
Nice idea, but poor name. Call it an "Instant Micro-Asteroid Field Generator" and you'll be able to sell them much more readily than calling it a "sandcaster". Unfortunately, military clients will begin referring to it by its initials...
Indeed. Cars are made on Earth. Trying to get more specific than that is delusion, i.e. marketing.
Yes, you could fuse that hydrogen/helium exhaust into heavier elements but it won't release as much energy. Basically you'll be adding mass to your spacecraft by putting another engine on but you won't be increasing your thrust as much as you may think.
Perhaps not, depending on what you thought, but it does avoid the problems of trying to run them in parallel, and the fact that the second engine doesn't need a ramscoop may make it's mass negligible compared to the first. Without knowing the engineering specifics, it's impossible to calculate, but it's certainly possible it would be a speed and efficiency win rather than a loss.
(Yes, I know spelled can be spelled "spelt", but it makes me cringe seeing it that way.)
Your country of origin colours your perception of spelling.
pardon my ignorance, but is spelt really the past tense of spell?
Whether it's considered "standard" or not depends on which country you're in, but yes.
So, it's a material difference to the person traveling, but not so material to the observer stationary relative to Alpha Centauri.
Actually, that could make a vast difference to the person watching you from Alpha Centauri. In one case, that person watches you go through 10 weeks worth of food, other consumables, and power to keep you alive during the trip. In the other case, they watch you make the trip and have dinner at your destination, saving a lot of energy by not having to accelerate a ten week supply of food and such for you to use during the trip. At high enough speeds, you can pretty much forgo any kind of life-support, just fling a tin can with enough air in it to last the journey. It's not only a material difference, but one that potentially saves a lot of energy (albeit probably not enough to cover the cost accelerating to the faster rate).
Ah, that's a much nicer analogy than the one I was thinking off.
Human beings are so fragile. Yeah, blame the murderer for killing someone... /eyeroll
Yeah, blame the criminals for exploiting a system...
Um, yes. That does make sense.
Yes, everyone is saying Facebook is the juggernaut that everyone uses, it can't be dethroned at this point. I can't help but think of the days when Netscape had essentially 100% of the browser market.
OTOH, it was a lot easier for a Netscape user to simply switch browsers than a user embedded in a social network to pull up roots and sink them into a different one. But on the third (gripping) hand, there are steps Google could take to help smooth that transition.
If there's anything I've learned over the years watching technology, it's that if everyone is suddenly climbing aboard a certain technology, it's time to find the next big thing.
I believe this was Microsoft's attitude when the Internet first started taking off.
Rule of thumb: if you're using "begs the question" correctly, you probably don't have to state what question is being begged, since that's implicit. An argument that "begs the question" is circular, so it boils down to "if (something is true), then (something is true)", which, of course, begs the question (the question being, "Well, is (something) true or not?").
There was a third Crocodile Dundee movie?
*googles*
Oh dear... /facepalm