And for real estate, that's not the biggest problem either, even in densely populated Europe. I'd think it's still cheaper to buy the land and built the track on ground than make it elevated everywhere (it's not like we need the land here: we already produce so much agricultural goods that we have to heavily regulate and that's one of the biggest political problems of the EU).
Well, it's a political problem. I don't know how easy it is to seize easments in France. But in the United States it's a long painful court process. Using a low profile, you could probably buy up easments a lot quicker than running a 20 foot graded bed.
But more important, I think people would really not accept it. Already people don't like having wind turbines around because they find them ugly and destroying the landscape. And I don't know for you, but I'm happy that we don't have those elevated highways that they love building in Japan or some US conurbations: those are really ugly. Not matter how light the construction is, it stills destroys the landscape and people do not accept that anymore.
I'd say this is a non-issue in the US. We are so used to interstates and ugly train tracks that the smooth graceful lines of a maglev are an improvement. From what I hear they don't make much noise when they pass. Well, I guess you have to put that in perspective. Have you ever heard the earth jrring racket that the Chicago heavy elevated line makes ?;-)
Beyond that, keeping it elevated is just a plain good idea. A deer strike at 50mph isn't that deal for a locomotive. Hitting a 5 point buck at 300 mph is bound to tear the lead car apart. Beyond that, a light Maglev train isn't something you want to expose to random objects being left on the track as pranksters are known to do.
As a side point, it shouldn't be a problem to pass the electrical lines under the tracks in some places to avoid them falling on the tracks.
I'm not talking about the ones running up to your house. I'm talking about high tension, high voltage lines. You would never run these close to the ground. The massive, undeveloped easments for these towers could be exploited for additional purposes. You'd simply have to protect those sections of track.
what city would be commercially interesting east of Chicago? St Louis, Denver, Seattle
Or south of Washington D.C.?. Orlando, Atlanta, Raleigh
I would imagine that the initial stages would be built as two way point-to-point connections. Along commuter routes, you'd have lots of stations. Eventually, those point to point connections would be inter-connected. But it would be important to lay out the routes before you started. Basically, the Interstate highway system is a pretty good map of which major cities would be interconnected.
I dare say that Indianapolis should be the hub of such a network given it's central location amongst the eastern cities. But Mayor Daley's political machine in Chicago would ultimately have it's goal of ALL transportation passing through Chicago;-)
Regarding the freight railway network. Leave it be. You could use abandoned routes for Maglev and still put pedestrian trails (and access roads) underneath it. Maglev can run parrallell to interstates when space allows. Look at the way the trains in Chicago runs smack dab in the middle of the interstate. This is 100% possible virtually EVERYWHERE provided a good concrete barrier wall protecting the pylons.
Thats the great benefit of totally elevated systems. They can go where traditional trains can't. They leave very little impact on their surroundings. As I mentioned before. You could run track across a farmers field and not interfere with his activities (beyond the miniscule land lost to the radius of the towers).
Boston to NYC. LA to San Fran. maybe even a network of the major cities.
The most economically feasible route is to take advantage of the long boarding and unboarding times for planes. Once the plane gets into the air, it has a huge speed advantage.
So your looking at a market that is geared at:
1) Regional travelers 2) Commuters 3) People who are afraid of flying.
You would lay out the tracks like the interstate system. So a routes would be
North-South: Milwaukee-Indianapolis-Louisville- Atlanta Orlando-Raleigh-Washington DC-Boston-New York
East West: New York-Pittsburgh-Indianapolis-St Louis-OK City-Denver
etc...
It would be geared to get to nearby metropolitan regions. It would also be geared to picking up commuters during commute times. During off-peak hours, it would haul a lot of overnight packages (in bomb-resistant containers). Seriously, the overnight packages would probably make more revenue than passengers;-)
Longer hauls would be organized as short stops across many cities. It's not an issue for these trains because they reach top speed in a couple minutes.
Regarding cost. I'd wager it would cost less than the stupid Moon/Mars shit that the president is proposing.
I saw the "Extreme Engineering" program on this concept.
It seems a bit "delicate" if you ask me. An accident would leave the tunnel irreparably flooded and the passengers drowned. See the internal vaccuum will turn any leak into gusher rapidly.
This would lead me to believe that the structure would need to be anchored and gated at regular intervals. That was if a single section failed, you wouldn't loose the entire tunnel.
Like most things on "extreme engineering" I doubt it will ever even be considered seriously.
I suspect that the trains would have their own cellular systems built in. They would then relay signals over their own (high speed)networks to their cell phone provider.
I would guess that you would likely see a lot of wireless nodes along the network linked with fiber optic-cable. They would operate at a frequency immune from the trains EM "woosh".
The tracks are elevated because trains with road crossings need to be built safely. That is, they need to withstand plowing into a fuel truck stalled on the tracks. As a result "Light" rail is actually heavier (unloaded) than freight rail.
Elevating the track allows you to make the cars lighter. Which is good considering that that lighter cars allow you to elevate the track CHEAPLY.
Another side effect of the elevation is real estate. Light rail with overhead lines is ugly and it takes up a good 80-100 feet for two directions and easement. An elevated system like Maglev has the footprint of billboard pilons. You can run it over a farmers field with ZERO disruption to his activities. You can also run it adjacent to existing roads and easements without disrupting existing functions.
In cases where you already have a track, traditional rail is an option. In a densely developed area, Ultra-Light elevated track is far more practical due to it's miniscule footprint.
I would predict that an excellent path for many MAGLEV systems will be in High Tension Power easements. Think about it. We already have these giant corridors cut out. The Maglev tracks also need a regular source of power. As long as the cars have a nice faraday cage built into the exterior, there should be no issue with eltrocuting passengers with fallen cables.
Well said. Airlines don't build airports. Governments build airports and thats a HUGE portion of the costs. It's just like governments building stadiums for football teams.
Dohh, my cut and paste got messed up. It should read like this.
This is just magnetic radiation. Get that? No "electro" involved. just like the poles of the earth, and magnets on your fridge. it won't hurt you any more than walking around with a magnet next to your head for 5 hours a day would.
Well, if we put him on a turntable and spun him REALLY fast, we could induce AC current in his body proportional to rotation speed and the magentic field strength;-)
While in Transrapid's back yard, plans for a maglev line between Hamburg and Berlin were derailed by the Green Party. As part of Gerhard Schroder's ruling coalition, it argued that the proposed line would damage wildlife with electromagnetic radiation, and that its concrete track-supports would spoil forests.
Well, if we put him on a turntable and spun him REALLY fast, we could induce AC current in his body proportional to the magentic field;-)
While in Transrapid's back yard, plans for a maglev line between Hamburg and Berlin were derailed by the Green Party. As part of Gerhard Schroder's ruling coalition, it argued that the proposed line would damage wildlife with electromagnetic radiation, and that its concrete track-supports would spoil forests.
What a bunch of total nonsense hogwash.
When the cancer from microwave ovens fad died down they invented the power line scare. Then they moved on to cancer from cell phones. So now everybody believes that magnetism causes cancer.
If your really so concerned, I suggest you stay away from CRT monitors, because they put out some pretty good magnetic fields.
Beyond this, you can simply add a nice copper mesh sheild inside the fiberclass shell of the vehicle to protect electronic equipment from noise.
They've been operating the TransRapid test track for quite some time and haven't noticed any profound effects like glasses flying off peoples faces. This could be equivalent to operating MRI equipment.
Finally, sit back and bask in the EM produced by well, just about everything in our modern world. And of course, nature also provided us with a prolific EM producer. It's called the sun.
If you can "control" it by concentrating... you probably DON'T have it. Thats part of the definition. You CAN'T concentrate when you really want to. Not that you simply have general concentration issues.
Yeah, there are some people out there who refuse to put there minds to things. This is what all ADDers are accused of being by pundits. And I'm sure that there are plenty of people diagnosed as ADD who are just bored, uninterested and yeah, lazy. It's not an exact science.
There are also ADDers who develop coping mechanisms. They organize their lives in ways to marginalize their problem. They get secretaries or spouses or other third persons that can manage some of their affairs and help direct them (like a certain president;-)
If you can control it through "putting your mind to it", it's probably not ADD. You could be one of those in the "overdiagnosed" category. Thats how non-ADDers get stuff done.
Well since we didn't have ICBMs at that point, it's kind of a moot issue. If they COULD have delivered the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs via missle, they WOULD have.
Oh yeah, and it wasn't a nuclear war since Japan had no nukes. In a nuclear war the #1 thing is to get gauruntee delivery of your nukes and try to knock out the other guys capacity before they can launch. Thats what all those missle submarines are for. Thats ALSO why each and every one of those missle boats are chased by one or more killer subs whose mission is to destroy the missle boat if it attempts to launch.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that a nuclear war is unwinnable.
No, I'm saying that Mars colonization is a non-issue to saving the human species from asteroids.
I am 100% for more capacity to map the smaller bits of the solar system. I am also for a comprehensive program of developing robots capable of nudging such objects off of a collision course.
There is nothing that manned Mars exploratoin will add to an asteroid defense system that couldn't be developed cheaper and better as an individual program. All that "technology trickle down" argument is a load of hooey. It's not a justification, it's a side affect.
If there is a particular desired "side effect", just fund it's development directly. Relying on expensive boondoggles to provide "trickle down technology" is a waste of money and terrible public policy.
The justification for the moon missions was proving to the world that we were better than the soviets. It was a political mission, not a scientific one. It did have some scientific and technological side affects. But those could have been achieved much cheaper through direct development.
Yeah, thats what they kept saying in Vietnam. We cannot force a solution on them from abroad. They welcomed the US as liberators until we started trying to run their country under the hubris that they couldn't do it themselves.
I agree, they probably COULDN'T do a very good job right now. But we are doing FAR WORSE.
Get the UN into the process. Get the US out of Iraqi politics. Give them a boilerplate constitution with the ability to amend or replace it. Elect a government and give them whatever help they would like.
This will benefit us far more in the end.
And BTW, if the Kurds want and independent state, GIVE IT TO THEM. That is provided they respect the border with Turkey. Turkey has been little or no help to the US so there is no need to push down the Kurds. They have been the most reliable group in the region and they will ultimately end up in civil war anyway once the Shi-Ites take over.
But first we need more robot telescopes to FIND near earth objects well before they're going to hit. "Total Impact" and "Armageddon" was fiction at it's finest.
In any case, those of you who propose Mars as the saving grace from extinction events save your breath. It would be far cheaper and more practical to dig VERY deep bunkers and put LOTS of food and water in them.
Of course, the energy expended in retrieving the helium-3 would negate any benefit from fusing it.
It would make a nice energy source for a moon base. So we should build a moon base to get it. Right?????
Besides, Fusion doesn't work yet. Perhaps we should build some reactors and burn off our earthbound Helium-3 before trampsing off to mars to collect fuel for a reactor that doesn't exist yet. In the interim, they could find a more workable system using plain old abundant Hydrogen that would negate the whole justification for mining the moon.
Regarding the orbital debris issue, there is enough mass in orbit already. All you would have to do is start turning it into finer particles. Thats where the critical mass issue comes from.
And no, if the planet is blanketed in orbiting cloud of chaotic super-velocity particles, space travel would be dangerous even for robots.
Finally, even if Helium-3 fusion becomes possible. It will still be WAY cheaper to send robots to get it.
Manned space flight is a solution searching desperately for a problem. Please solve it with your own cash. We have better uses for the money here on Earth.
It's difficult for me to understand someone who calls Discovery Channel scientific porn and at the same time idealizes the space program.
Discovery, TLC, Nova, History, etc... provide excellent introductions into science and technology. Do they learn how to do chemistry. No, but they learn about chemistry and what chemistry is used for. They learn about physics and engineering. They learn about mechanics from junkyard wars.
The point is that most people learn best when things are made relevant or entertaining. Hence, thats why all the Mr Wizard stuff is entertaining. Mix in some excellent graphics, audio add some history and you have great presentations and real retention.
The space program by contrast provides little or no insight into ANYTHING. Wow, astronauts drinking tang in space. Wow, next channel. Yeah, it makes for great posters to put up in science classrooms, but it does little more than that.
By the way, I would point out if you want to leave and get away from me, there is a virtually uninhabited continent on this planet. It's called Antarctica. It has 10,000 time more resources than the moon. It has a breathable atmosphere and abundant water that doesn't have to be extracted by incinerating rocks. They also have penguins there which would probably be good eating.
Finally, it would cost trillions less to colonize antarctica than it would the Moon or Mars. Please feel free as there is nothing to stop you. Just don't be surprised when society isn't ready to finance your relocation costs to Antarctica, the Moon or anywhere else.
If you want to go so badly, form a Mars society with like minded people and finance it privately. Those of us who are happy with the abundant resources of North America will stay put and try to make this a happier better place to live for everyone, not just the priveleged like yourself.
Have you considered that there may be a difference between your experience and others?
You may be able to simply put your mind to it in order to concentrate. But I would point out that this is the precise definition of attention deficit. It is really mislabled. It should be called Directional Focus disorder.
Some people, irregardless how much they try, cannot focus on a task sometimes. I can remember staring at books and trying to read them and being COMPLETELY unable to do it. I would start and my mind would quickly drift. Attempt after attempt would fail.
When your prepared to do the work and WANT to do the work and CANNOT, that is not laziness. It's not disinterest because you've already expressed interest in learning or the process. Your mind simply won't cooperate.
BTW, have you considered the possibility that some people have mild ADD and some people have RAGING ADD. Is it possible that this is not a Black/White phenomenon?
Finally, the fact that administering a stimulant will fix the issue time after time is a strong indication that this is biochemical in nature.
There are lots of people interested in spouting that they have "overcome" when in fact they've never truly been faced with real adversity. That is, they were pulled uphill.
I would suggest that you do more research before spouting your theories on what ADD is and is not. At the very least, there are people who have gone to med school and studied the issue extensively who believe it is VERY real. Of course, people with ADD KNOW it is real because they can tell the difference with and without their stimulant medication.
If you don't HAVE ADD and haven't read the research, you have ZERO frame of reference from which to issue an informed opinion.
3. I'm going bald. (Hey... we all get old eventually) Solution? There's just too many to go into, but I'll point out that the list of side effect for Propecia is mind boggling. Especially the one that says to not even TOUCH Propecia if you are pregnant!
Read the packaging insert carefully and look at what the REAL risks are. Companies have to publish those risks because of legal requirements.
Same goes for the warning for pregnant women not to touch propecia. If you can seriously find a doctor that thinks that touching propecia is a tangible risk for pregnant women, I will be shocked. This is coming from lawyers preventing nonsese lawsuits.
Why you say??? Because the number of miscarriages women have are staggering. Then one day someone suggests that they touched their husbands propecia and BOOM, there is a class action lawsuit.
The juries are sympathetic because of teary testimony from women who lost their prenancies. The fact that the lawyers can't PROVE it has nothing to do with the issue. So they just print a draconian warning so they can go to court and say "I told you so".
BTW, this is nothing unique to Propecia. Most medications specifically warn against use by pregnant women for that reason. Drug companies almost invariably won't conduct trials with pregnant women so there is no way to legally "clear" a product for use with pregnancy.
Before spouting off risks, read the science behind them. Some of them are real and profound > 3%. Others are misicule like 0.3%.
Based on the experience of myself and many others, I have come to the conclusion that Attention Deficit is not a disorder inasmuch as it is a different form of thinking and interacting with the world which can have both its downsides and its blessings. We may have trouble in the standard school and work paradigms that most seem to be able to deal with successfully, but we also tend to be very insightful, creative, and interesting folks:)
When using a hex wrench with phillips screw, one needs an adapter. In so far as traditional education is incompatible with ADDers, they need some form of adapter. For many folks, prescription stimulants do the trick. Though, I'm sure it doesn't work for some.
As much as it would seem appropriate to "change" a school. You must remember, that schools are always stretched thin and on limited resources. You have to do the best to adapt to your environment before asking it to adapt for you.
Well, I know one place that would be a first strike. A certain airbase in Missouri where ALL the B-2s are kept. Shit it would be worth it just to airburst the B2's paths from Missouri to Russian targets. They really aren't that sturdy.
Yeah, you can recall a plane. But bombers don't start nuclear wars. ICBMs start nuclear wars. And once they start, there is no way to stop them.
By the time the bombers arrive, there will be nothing left but ashes.
Slashdot Mirror
And for real estate, that's not the biggest problem either, even in densely populated Europe. I'd think it's still cheaper to buy the land and built the track on ground than make it elevated everywhere (it's not like we need the land here: we already produce so much agricultural goods that we have to heavily regulate and that's one of the biggest political problems of the EU).
;-)
Well, it's a political problem. I don't know how easy it is to seize easments in France. But in the United States it's a long painful court process. Using a low profile, you could probably buy up easments a lot quicker than running a 20 foot graded bed.
But more important, I think people would really not accept it. Already people don't like having wind turbines around because they find them ugly and destroying the landscape. And I don't know for you, but I'm happy that we don't have those elevated highways that they love building in Japan or some US conurbations: those are really ugly. Not matter how light the construction is, it stills destroys the landscape and people do not accept that anymore.
I'd say this is a non-issue in the US. We are so used to interstates and ugly train tracks that the smooth graceful lines of a maglev are an improvement. From what I hear they don't make much noise when they pass. Well, I guess you have to put that in perspective. Have you ever heard the earth jrring racket that the Chicago heavy elevated line makes ?
Beyond that, keeping it elevated is just a plain good idea. A deer strike at 50mph isn't that deal for a locomotive. Hitting a 5 point buck at 300 mph is bound to tear the lead car apart. Beyond that, a light Maglev train isn't something you want to expose to random objects being left on the track as pranksters are known to do.
As a side point, it shouldn't be a problem to pass the electrical lines under the tracks in some places to avoid them falling on the tracks.
I'm not talking about the ones running up to your house. I'm talking about high tension, high voltage lines. You would never run these close to the ground. The massive, undeveloped easments for these towers could be exploited for additional purposes. You'd simply have to protect those sections of track.
When comparing TGV to Maglev, you have to remember all the wires. Well, they're ugly.
Maglev rail can actually enhance a skyline given proper pylon spacing and styling.
what city would be commercially interesting east of Chicago?
;-)
St Louis, Denver, Seattle
Or south of Washington D.C.?.
Orlando, Atlanta, Raleigh
I would imagine that the initial stages would be built as two way point-to-point connections. Along commuter routes, you'd have lots of stations. Eventually, those point to point connections would be inter-connected. But it would be important to lay out the routes before you started. Basically, the Interstate highway system is a pretty good map of which major cities would be interconnected.
I dare say that Indianapolis should be the hub of such a network given it's central location amongst the eastern cities. But Mayor Daley's political machine in Chicago would ultimately have it's goal of ALL transportation passing through Chicago
Regarding the freight railway network. Leave it be. You could use abandoned routes for Maglev and still put pedestrian trails (and access roads) underneath it. Maglev can run parrallell to interstates when space allows. Look at the way the trains in Chicago runs smack dab in the middle of the interstate. This is 100% possible virtually EVERYWHERE provided a good concrete barrier wall protecting the pylons.
Thats the great benefit of totally elevated systems. They can go where traditional trains can't. They leave very little impact on their surroundings. As I mentioned before. You could run track across a farmers field and not interfere with his activities (beyond the miniscule land lost to the radius of the towers).
Boston to NYC. LA to San Fran. maybe even a network of the major cities.
- Atlanta Orlando-Raleigh-Washington DC-Boston-New York
;-)
The most economically feasible route is to take advantage of the long boarding and unboarding times for planes. Once the plane gets into the air, it has a huge speed advantage.
So your looking at a market that is geared at:
1) Regional travelers
2) Commuters
3) People who are afraid of flying.
You would lay out the tracks like the interstate system. So a routes would be
North-South:
Milwaukee-Indianapolis-Louisville
East West:
New York-Pittsburgh-Indianapolis-St Louis-OK City-Denver
etc...
It would be geared to get to nearby metropolitan regions. It would also be geared to picking up commuters during commute times. During off-peak hours, it would haul a lot of overnight packages (in bomb-resistant containers). Seriously, the overnight packages would probably make more revenue than passengers
Longer hauls would be organized as short stops across many cities. It's not an issue for these trains because they reach top speed in a couple minutes.
Regarding cost. I'd wager it would cost less than the stupid Moon/Mars shit that the president is proposing.
I saw the "Extreme Engineering" program on this concept.
It seems a bit "delicate" if you ask me. An accident would leave the tunnel irreparably flooded and the passengers drowned. See the internal vaccuum will turn any leak into gusher rapidly.
This would lead me to believe that the structure would need to be anchored and gated at regular intervals. That was if a single section failed, you wouldn't loose the entire tunnel.
Like most things on "extreme engineering" I doubt it will ever even be considered seriously.
I suspect that the trains would have their own cellular systems built in. They would then relay signals over their own (high speed)networks to their cell phone provider.
I would guess that you would likely see a lot of wireless nodes along the network linked with fiber optic-cable. They would operate at a frequency immune from the trains EM "woosh".
The tracks are elevated because trains with road crossings need to be built safely. That is, they need to withstand plowing into a fuel truck stalled on the tracks. As a result "Light" rail is actually heavier (unloaded) than freight rail.
Elevating the track allows you to make the cars lighter. Which is good considering that that lighter cars allow you to elevate the track CHEAPLY.
Another side effect of the elevation is real estate. Light rail with overhead lines is ugly and it takes up a good 80-100 feet for two directions and easement. An elevated system like Maglev has the footprint of billboard pilons. You can run it over a farmers field with ZERO disruption to his activities. You can also run it adjacent to existing roads and easements without disrupting existing functions.
In cases where you already have a track, traditional rail is an option. In a densely developed area, Ultra-Light elevated track is far more practical due to it's miniscule footprint.
I would predict that an excellent path for many MAGLEV systems will be in High Tension Power easements. Think about it. We already have these giant corridors cut out. The Maglev tracks also need a regular source of power. As long as the cars have a nice faraday cage built into the exterior, there should be no issue with eltrocuting passengers with fallen cables.
Well said. Airlines don't build airports. Governments build airports and thats a HUGE portion of the costs. It's just like governments building stadiums for football teams.
My understanding was that Transrapid got a portion of it's lift from aerodynamics. It runs on rollers until it gets up to speed.
Dohh, my cut and paste got messed up. It should read like this.
;-)
This is just magnetic radiation. Get that? No "electro" involved. just like the poles of the earth, and magnets on your fridge. it won't hurt you any more than walking around with a magnet next to your head for 5 hours a day would.
Well, if we put him on a turntable and spun him REALLY fast, we could induce AC current in his body proportional to rotation speed and the magentic field strength
While in Transrapid's back yard, plans for a maglev line between Hamburg and Berlin were derailed by the Green Party. As part of Gerhard Schroder's ruling coalition, it argued that the proposed line would damage wildlife with electromagnetic radiation, and that its concrete track-supports would spoil forests.
;-)
Well, if we put him on a turntable and spun him REALLY fast, we could induce AC current in his body proportional to the magentic field
From the article.
While in Transrapid's back yard, plans for a maglev line between Hamburg and Berlin were derailed by the Green Party. As part of Gerhard Schroder's ruling coalition, it argued that the proposed line would damage wildlife with electromagnetic radiation, and that its concrete track-supports would spoil forests.
What a bunch of total nonsense hogwash.
When the cancer from microwave ovens fad died down they invented the power line scare. Then they moved on to cancer from cell phones. So now everybody believes that magnetism causes cancer.
If your really so concerned, I suggest you stay away from CRT monitors, because they put out some pretty good magnetic fields.
Beyond this, you can simply add a nice copper mesh sheild inside the fiberclass shell of the vehicle to protect electronic equipment from noise.
They've been operating the TransRapid test track for quite some time and haven't noticed any profound effects like glasses flying off peoples faces. This could be equivalent to operating MRI equipment.
Finally, sit back and bask in the EM produced by well, just about everything in our modern world. And of course, nature also provided us with a prolific EM producer. It's called the sun.
If you can "control" it by concentrating ...
;-)
you probably DON'T have it. Thats part of the definition. You CAN'T concentrate when you really want to. Not that you simply have general concentration issues.
Yeah, there are some people out there who refuse to put there minds to things. This is what all ADDers are accused of being by pundits. And I'm sure that there are plenty of people diagnosed as ADD who are just bored, uninterested and yeah, lazy. It's not an exact science.
There are also ADDers who develop coping mechanisms. They organize their lives in ways to marginalize their problem. They get secretaries or spouses or other third persons that can manage some of their affairs and help direct them (like a certain president
If you can control it through "putting your mind to it", it's probably not ADD. You could be one of those in the "overdiagnosed" category. Thats how non-ADDers get stuff done.
Well since we didn't have ICBMs at that point, it's kind of a moot issue. If they COULD have delivered the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs via missle, they WOULD have.
Oh yeah, and it wasn't a nuclear war since Japan had no nukes. In a nuclear war the #1 thing is to get gauruntee delivery of your nukes and try to knock out the other guys capacity before they can launch. Thats what all those missle submarines are for. Thats ALSO why each and every one of those missle boats are chased by one or more killer subs whose mission is to destroy the missle boat if it attempts to launch.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that a nuclear war is unwinnable.
No, I'm saying that Mars colonization is a non-issue to saving the human species from asteroids.
I am 100% for more capacity to map the smaller bits of the solar system. I am also for a comprehensive program of developing robots capable of nudging such objects off of a collision course.
There is nothing that manned Mars exploratoin will add to an asteroid defense system that couldn't be developed cheaper and better as an individual program. All that "technology trickle down" argument is a load of hooey. It's not a justification, it's a side affect.
If there is a particular desired "side effect", just fund it's development directly. Relying on expensive boondoggles to provide "trickle down technology" is a waste of money and terrible public policy.
The justification for the moon missions was proving to the world that we were better than the soviets. It was a political mission, not a scientific one. It did have some scientific and technological side affects. But those could have been achieved much cheaper through direct development.
Like the other posters say:
1) Go to the moon.
2) ???????
3) Profit.
Yeah, thats what they kept saying in Vietnam. We cannot force a solution on them from abroad. They welcomed the US as liberators until we started trying to run their country under the hubris that they couldn't do it themselves.
I agree, they probably COULDN'T do a very good job right now. But we are doing FAR WORSE.
Get the UN into the process. Get the US out of Iraqi politics. Give them a boilerplate constitution with the ability to amend or replace it. Elect a government and give them whatever help they would like.
This will benefit us far more in the end.
And BTW, if the Kurds want and independent state, GIVE IT TO THEM. That is provided they respect the border with Turkey. Turkey has been little or no help to the US so there is no need to push down the Kurds. They have been the most reliable group in the region and they will ultimately end up in civil war anyway once the Shi-Ites take over.
Robots.
But first we need more robot telescopes to FIND near earth objects well before they're going to hit. "Total Impact" and "Armageddon" was fiction at it's finest.
In any case, those of you who propose Mars as the saving grace from extinction events save your breath. It would be far cheaper and more practical to dig VERY deep bunkers and put LOTS of food and water in them.
Of course, the energy expended in retrieving the helium-3 would negate any benefit from fusing it.
It would make a nice energy source for a moon base. So we should build a moon base to get it. Right?????
Besides, Fusion doesn't work yet. Perhaps we should build some reactors and burn off our earthbound Helium-3 before trampsing off to mars to collect fuel for a reactor that doesn't exist yet. In the interim, they could find a more workable system using plain old abundant Hydrogen that would negate the whole justification for mining the moon.
Regarding the orbital debris issue, there is enough mass in orbit already. All you would have to do is start turning it into finer particles. Thats where the critical mass issue comes from.
And no, if the planet is blanketed in orbiting cloud of chaotic super-velocity particles, space travel would be dangerous even for robots.
Finally, even if Helium-3 fusion becomes possible. It will still be WAY cheaper to send robots to get it.
Manned space flight is a solution searching desperately for a problem. Please solve it with your own cash. We have better uses for the money here on Earth.
It's difficult for me to understand someone who calls Discovery Channel scientific porn and at the same time idealizes the space program.
Discovery, TLC, Nova, History, etc... provide excellent introductions into science and technology. Do they learn how to do chemistry. No, but they learn about chemistry and what chemistry is used for. They learn about physics and engineering. They learn about mechanics from junkyard wars.
The point is that most people learn best when things are made relevant or entertaining. Hence, thats why all the Mr Wizard stuff is entertaining. Mix in some excellent graphics, audio add some history and you have great presentations and real retention.
The space program by contrast provides little or no insight into ANYTHING. Wow, astronauts drinking tang in space. Wow, next channel. Yeah, it makes for great posters to put up in science classrooms, but it does little more than that.
By the way, I would point out if you want to leave and get away from me, there is a virtually uninhabited continent on this planet. It's called Antarctica. It has 10,000 time more resources than the moon. It has a breathable atmosphere and abundant water that doesn't have to be extracted by incinerating rocks. They also have penguins there which would probably be good eating.
Finally, it would cost trillions less to colonize antarctica than it would the Moon or Mars. Please feel free as there is nothing to stop you. Just don't be surprised when society isn't ready to finance your relocation costs to Antarctica, the Moon or anywhere else.
If you want to go so badly, form a Mars society with like minded people and finance it privately. Those of us who are happy with the abundant resources of North America will stay put and try to make this a happier better place to live for everyone, not just the priveleged like yourself.
Have you considered that there may be a difference between your experience and others?
You may be able to simply put your mind to it in order to concentrate. But I would point out that this is the precise definition of attention deficit. It is really mislabled. It should be called Directional Focus disorder.
Some people, irregardless how much they try, cannot focus on a task sometimes. I can remember staring at books and trying to read them and being COMPLETELY unable to do it. I would start and my mind would quickly drift. Attempt after attempt would fail.
When your prepared to do the work and WANT to do the work and CANNOT, that is not laziness. It's not disinterest because you've already expressed interest in learning or the process. Your mind simply won't cooperate.
BTW, have you considered the possibility that some people have mild ADD and some people have RAGING ADD. Is it possible that this is not a Black/White phenomenon?
Finally, the fact that administering a stimulant will fix the issue time after time is a strong indication that this is biochemical in nature.
There are lots of people interested in spouting that they have "overcome" when in fact they've never truly been faced with real adversity. That is, they were pulled uphill.
I would suggest that you do more research before spouting your theories on what ADD is and is not. At the very least, there are people who have gone to med school and studied the issue extensively who believe it is VERY real. Of course, people with ADD KNOW it is real because they can tell the difference with and without their stimulant medication.
If you don't HAVE ADD and haven't read the research, you have ZERO frame of reference from which to issue an informed opinion.
3. I'm going bald. (Hey... we all get old eventually) Solution? There's just too many to go into, but I'll point out that the list of side effect for Propecia is mind boggling. Especially the one that says to not even TOUCH Propecia if you are pregnant!
Read the packaging insert carefully and look at what the REAL risks are. Companies have to publish those risks because of legal requirements.
Same goes for the warning for pregnant women not to touch propecia. If you can seriously find a doctor that thinks that touching propecia is a tangible risk for pregnant women, I will be shocked. This is coming from lawyers preventing nonsese lawsuits.
Why you say??? Because the number of miscarriages women have are staggering. Then one day someone suggests that they touched their husbands propecia and BOOM, there is a class action lawsuit.
The juries are sympathetic because of teary testimony from women who lost their prenancies. The fact that the lawyers can't PROVE it has nothing to do with the issue. So they just print a draconian warning so they can go to court and say "I told you so".
BTW, this is nothing unique to Propecia. Most medications specifically warn against use by pregnant women for that reason. Drug companies almost invariably won't conduct trials with pregnant women so there is no way to legally "clear" a product for use with pregnancy.
Before spouting off risks, read the science behind them. Some of them are real and profound > 3%. Others are misicule like 0.3%.
Based on the experience of myself and many others, I have come to the conclusion that Attention Deficit is not a disorder inasmuch as it is a different form of thinking and interacting with the world which can have both its downsides and its blessings. We may have trouble in the standard school and work paradigms that most seem to be able to deal with successfully, but we also tend to be very insightful, creative, and interesting folks :)
When using a hex wrench with phillips screw, one needs an adapter. In so far as traditional education is incompatible with ADDers, they need some form of adapter. For many folks, prescription stimulants do the trick. Though, I'm sure it doesn't work for some.
As much as it would seem appropriate to "change" a school. You must remember, that schools are always stretched thin and on limited resources. You have to do the best to adapt to your environment before asking it to adapt for you.
Well, I know one place that would be a first strike. A certain airbase in Missouri where ALL the B-2s are kept. Shit it would be worth it just to airburst the B2's paths from Missouri to Russian targets. They really aren't that sturdy.
Yeah, you can recall a plane. But bombers don't start nuclear wars. ICBMs start nuclear wars. And once they start, there is no way to stop them.
By the time the bombers arrive, there will be nothing left but ashes.
No, there expecting it to keep old grandmothers from starving or freezing to death.