!@#!@#$#!!!!! God! forgot the closing tag. Reprinted correctly for your reading pleasure:
Greenhouse effects simply can't raise temperatures that high, not even with the most extreme conditions.
Well, greenhouse and it's proximity to the sun. Venus is at the inner end of the Golidlox zone. With an earth-like atmosphere, I bet temperatures of 150 F would not be uncommon in the tropical zones, and the polar regions would be more like temperate regions on earth. Keep in mind that Venus's atmosphere is over 90 times as dense as the earth's and it is mostly CO2. It also has a very thick cloud layer made of sulfuric acid instead of water that traps in more heat.
Greenhouse effects simply can't raise temperatures that high, not even with the most extreme conditions.
Well, greenhouse and it's proximity to the sun. Venus is at the inner end of the Golidlox zone. With an earth-like atmosphere, I bet temperatures of 150 F would not be uncommon in the tropical zones, and the polar regions would be more like temperate regions on earth. Keep in mind that Venus's atmosphere is over 90 times as dense as the earth's and it is mostly CO2. It also has a very thick cloud layer made of sulfuric acid instead of water that traps in more heat.
Actually, the Alvord is just as dry or drier than the Sonoran. It gets 3 inches of rain a year. The northwest is only wet west of the cascades.
The rain shadow of the cascades reduces rainfall in the eastern oregon area to about 5 inches. Steens mountain sucks even more moisture out, reducing it to 3. The alvord desert has too little vegetation to start a fire.
Considering that there are >100 billion galaxies, each with around 100 billion stars, that just means one earth-like planet for every 300 billion stars or three galaxies.
This seems like an underestimation to me. I would say more like 1,000,000,000 earth-like planets in every galaxy.
If half of all stars had planets (a resonable guess), at least a few of these would have stable orbits around orange dwarf stars and have a similar composition to earth.
Planets with similar size and orbit to earth would most likely develop life. (Planets smaller than earth would have their atmospheres drift off and oceans boil away, like Mars) Bacterial life is most likely quite common in the universe. It developed here on earth and most likely developed on Mars. Any planet with a resonable climate, liquid water, and volcanism (it provides necessary chemicals) will likely develop bacterial life. Volcanism is very common on all larger planets, the habitable zone is large, encompassing three planets (Venus, Earth, and Mars), so planets in habitable zones are undoubtedly very common, and oceans are common. Earth has oceans, Europa does, and Mars used to.
BTW, Venus really is in the habitable zone. It's very high pressure CO2 atmosphere just creates an extreme greenhouse effect, heating it up hot enough to melt lead. Mars used to have liquid water and more of an atmosphere, which made it warmer. Mars most likely had life.
Now, more advanced multicellular life is much more rare. First of all, it was three billion years on earth before multicellular life just happened to evolve. So on many planets, bacteria probably just never evolved much farther. Secondly, multicellular animal life is aerobic and needs oxygen. So unless the atmosphere is already oxygen-rich, photosythesizing bacteria would have to develop first.
Bacterial life is common, multicellular life is much less common. (Maybe occuring 10% of the time that bacterial life does.) Now intelligent life. There might only be 30 billion planets with technical civilizations in the universe. First of all, intelligence has to evolve. When you think about it, life has been around for 3.7 billion years. In that time, modern humans have only been around for about 150,000 years. Of that time, we have only been capable of sending and recieving radio signals in intersteller distances for 40 years. Most likely we will annihilate ourselves with antimatter weapons in the next 10,000 years.
For a planet with multicellular life, lets say 1 in 10 will develop intelligent life at some point. And probably many of these intelligent creatures won't develop radio. And those that do will probably only have a radio civilization lastling less than 10,000 years.
So lets see: In our galaxy, 1 in every 100 stars has an earthlike planet. Half of these have life. So 1 in every 200 systems has life. 10% of these have multicellular life, so 1 in 2,000. 10% of these have had intelligent life at some point, 1 in 2,000,000. Say 1 in five of these develop a radio civilization, so 1 in ten million. If radio civilzations last an average of 10,000 years, there is one radio civilization currently for every 5 billion stars. So there may be several in our galaxy. But communicating with them is probably pointless because they would most likely be thousands of lightyears away.
Actually, pulsejets don't need forward speed to start. A pulsejet is a combustion chamber with one-way reed valves on the front end. All you do is spray fuel into the combustion chamber and ignite. The fuel explodes. The pressure causes the front reed valves to close, therefore making the explosion blow out the back only, creating thrust.
This happens at many hundreds of times a second, each time the reed valves opening to admit new air and the fuel gets sprayed in. Pulsejets are simple but inneficient and very, very, very loud. They sound somwhat like a two cycle engine with 100 more decibels.
Ramjets are just basically tubes where fuel is burned under compression from moving air. Ramjets need to be going at least a few hundred miles per hour to work well. The plus side is that ramjets are very efficient and can travel very fast, up to mach five. (The limit for turbojets is about mach 2.5. The SR 71 accomplished mach 3 by turning off it's turbines and only using the afterburner, basically turning it into a ramjet)
A ramjet can only get to Mach 5-7 because the air needs to be slowed down to subsonic speeds. This is usualy accomplished with a supersonic conical diffuser, which slows and compresses the air. (Compressed air is slowed down at supersonic speeds) After mach 6, the engine encounters severe aerodynamic problems when slowing down the air.
For speeds from Mach 5-30, you need a Scramjet, or supersonic combustion ramjet. These burn fuel travelling through the engine at supersonic speeds. They are fast and efficient like ramjets. But they have to be going mach 4 to start working.
So a dream aircraft would be one that has combo ramjet-scramjet engine with a retractable reed-valve cover for to convert it to a pulsejet. Such a craft could gain altitude, then go into a dive, getting to low supersonic speeds where the ramjet would begin to work, accelerating it to scramjet speeds.
Such a craft would be able to fly into orbit without the need for rockets.
Rocket engines are much more powerful, lighter, and more efficient (bizarely enough.)
You're correct on the powerful and lighter part. But rockets are far less efficient in the atmosphere than jets. Rockets get a maximum specific impulse of 500, while jets can get 5,000.
Jets are inherently more efficient because they don't need oxidiser and most of the working mass is air.
Yes the DMCA sucks, but so does having your plane crash because some "rocket man" happened to launch a small missile into the flight-path of one of its engine intakes at the wrong time.
The chances of that happening are very infestimal. Airspace is a big area. He will be crossing the 25-40 thousand foot range of commercial flights for probably less than a minute. He is launching in a remote part of Eastern Oregon where jets don't even cross. So anyway, let's say a jet crosses somewhere in the Alvord Desert every hour (an overestimate). The Alvord Desert is about a 30 by 15 mile salt flat area between a huge desert mountain and another desert area. So anyway, the total area is about 450 square miles. A jet would cross it in less than two minutes. A jet takes up a volume of air say 150 x 150 x 30. That is 675 thousand ft 3. The total volume of air from the 25-40 thousand foot level over the Alvord desert is 188 trillion cubic feet. At any point in time, the jet is taking up 1 279 billionth of the airspace in the Alvord Desert. The chances of the rocket hitting a passing jet are one in over 100 trillion. The chances of it hitting a habitated area are one in infinity, because there are no habitated areas anywhere in the rocket's range.
For those of you not in the know, the rocket guy is launching in the Alvord Desert near Steens Mountain, Eastern Oregon.
Eastern Oregon is a desolate desert area that makes Nevada look like Manhattan. It is so desolate that the nearest town is Frenchglen, 35 air miles away with a population of 25. The nearest town of over 500 is Burns, which is over 100 miles away. The rocket isn't going near any populated area. The FAA shouldn't worry.
If you have a watch that has glowing hands (not the indiglo kind), you use tritium yourself.
The watch dials and stuff are painted with phosporus. An ultra-small amount of tritium provides neutrons to get the phosphorus to glow.
Raduim used to be used for watches. Now it has mostly moved to tritium.
Re:The sad truth about "Cancer Cures'
on
Kills Tumors Dead
·
· Score: 2
Actually, everyone already has cancer genes already hardwired into their genetic code. Why? Who knows. Maybe to limit our lifespans so we don't burden our children.
Cancer is caused when a few of these cancer-protein producing genes are turned on mutations. These genes then begin to pump out proteins, producing a useless, immortal, rapidly reproducing cancer cell.
This is really a weird. When you think about it, AoTC and Spiderman are both competing for the same market (Gen-x geeks). It's nice to see that a movie actually won out over a Star Wars movie. I liked AoTC, but Spiderman was even better.
Now, I dissagree with Katz: Spiderman was hyped even more than AoTC.
He has bought a Russian pressure suit. As for engine failure, he is buying commercial peroxide rockets, which are very reliable due to their monoproppelent simplicity. The rocket is very unlikely to fail.
The usual boundary for space is 50 miles, just below minimum low earth orbit. Other than regular rockets, only the X-15 Rocket Plane has reached this height.
I need my KB at exactly the right height, also. In addition, I like to have one of those removable KB foam pads. I had the kind that are installed with KB's. Those suck. Anyway, these foam pads give me some place to rest my wrists, so I don't have to constantly have them bent to rest them on my desk.
Ergonomic KBs are hard to type with and they just make my pain worse.
I know I shouldn't feed the trolls. But, I cannot resist.
Whether or not he's a moron, he's still smarter than you
Bush is an idiot. The only reason he does a good job at the seat of president is that he has a few good advisors (ie. Sec. of Defense Rumsfield). I'd say, with his advisors, Bush is fairly good at foreign policy, while (with the likes of Ashcroft) his domestic policy sucks. Bush is an idiot however.
The insulin your son gets does not come from harvested embryos, and no one is objecting to it.
Stem cells for diabetics are used for the pancreas, so the diabetic can produce his own insulin like a normal person.
Stem cells are really the future of medicine, if our idiotic leaders will allow it. When an artery is clogged or the kidneys are failing, you can just have them replaced with the aid of stem cells and very advanced surgical techniques. This could extend human lifespan past 100 years. But, as it's looking today with our esteemed President Bush, I am beginning to wonder if we will ever have stem cells.
Gattaca was one of the best movies I've ever seen. It's not a *yawn*! Some people expect all Sci-fi flicks to be action packed, with lots of spaceships and lasers, like Star Wars. Well, Gattaca is more of an art movie like Citizen Kane. Kane is not action packed but it is considered the best movie ever made.
Gattaca provided a very good, realistic view of th future. It is what Sci-fi movies should be like.
I think GATTACA is #1, with 2001 #2, and Blade Runner coming in third. I think Star Wars is down the list. Star Wars is a good exciting popcorn flick but it is not really such a great movie.
Let's see: He has a stable government, provides all the basic needs for his citizens (they have better medical care than we do), and, lately, he has been very friendly toward the US. That is much better than many other countries in the Carribean that are full of starving, repressed people.
I believe the only thing holding Cuba back from becoming by far the richest country in the Carribean is our embargo. It should be lifted.
But many unstable countries need harsh dictatorships so they don't plunge into chaos. So what if a dictator kills 3,000 political enemies? That can prevent the death of tens of thousands by preventing the government from being overthrown and the country plunged into a bloody civil war. Sometimes you have to sacrifice a few to save many. Many countries (ie Nigeria) are simply incapable of having a steady democracy like we enjoy. Their only option is a strong dictatorship.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, that is one reason. Another reason is that the European consumers care about pumping the environment full of CO2.
So you must only care about the environment when you are in Europe? You don't seem to care in America.
Think living metal plants absorbing gamma radiation instead of light radiation.
Unfortunately, there can be no metal based organisms. Only silicon and carbon have rich enough chemistry.
I believe this is an overestimate.
I thought Lucas was crazy to assume that there could be a galaxy with so many habitable worlds.
The majority of these are most likely not habitable.
!@#!@#$#!!!!! God! forgot the closing tag. Reprinted correctly for your reading pleasure:
Greenhouse effects simply can't raise temperatures that high, not even with the most extreme conditions.
Well, greenhouse and it's proximity to the sun. Venus is at the inner end of the Golidlox zone. With an earth-like atmosphere, I bet temperatures of 150 F would not be uncommon in the tropical zones, and the polar regions would be more like temperate regions on earth. Keep in mind that Venus's atmosphere is over 90 times as dense as the earth's and it is mostly CO2. It also has a very thick cloud layer made of sulfuric acid instead of water that traps in more heat.
Greenhouse effects simply can't raise temperatures that high, not even with the most extreme conditions.
Well, greenhouse and it's proximity to the sun. Venus is at the inner end of the Golidlox zone. With an earth-like atmosphere, I bet temperatures of 150 F would not be uncommon in the tropical zones, and the polar regions would be more like temperate regions on earth. Keep in mind that Venus's atmosphere is over 90 times as dense as the earth's and it is mostly CO2. It also has a very thick cloud layer made of sulfuric acid instead of water that traps in more heat.
Actually, the Alvord is just as dry or drier than the Sonoran. It gets 3 inches of rain a year. The northwest is only wet west of the cascades.
The rain shadow of the cascades reduces rainfall in the eastern oregon area to about 5 inches. Steens mountain sucks even more moisture out, reducing it to 3. The alvord desert has too little vegetation to start a fire.
BTW, the craters of idaho has towns nearby.
Jeez. That's not too optimistic.
Considering that there are >100 billion galaxies, each with around 100 billion stars, that just means one earth-like planet for every 300 billion stars or three galaxies.
This seems like an underestimation to me. I would say more like 1,000,000,000 earth-like planets in every galaxy.
If half of all stars had planets (a resonable guess), at least a few of these would have stable orbits around orange dwarf stars and have a similar composition to earth.
Planets with similar size and orbit to earth would most likely develop life. (Planets smaller than earth would have their atmospheres drift off and oceans boil away, like Mars) Bacterial life is most likely quite common in the universe. It developed here on earth and most likely developed on Mars. Any planet with a resonable climate, liquid water, and volcanism (it provides necessary chemicals) will likely develop bacterial life. Volcanism is very common on all larger planets, the habitable zone is large, encompassing three planets (Venus, Earth, and Mars), so planets in habitable zones are undoubtedly very common, and oceans are common. Earth has oceans, Europa does, and Mars used to.
BTW, Venus really is in the habitable zone. It's very high pressure CO2 atmosphere just creates an extreme greenhouse effect, heating it up hot enough to melt lead. Mars used to have liquid water and more of an atmosphere, which made it warmer. Mars most likely had life.
Now, more advanced multicellular life is much more rare. First of all, it was three billion years on earth before multicellular life just happened to evolve. So on many planets, bacteria probably just never evolved much farther. Secondly, multicellular animal life is aerobic and needs oxygen. So unless the atmosphere is already oxygen-rich, photosythesizing bacteria would have to develop first.
Bacterial life is common, multicellular life is much less common. (Maybe occuring 10% of the time that bacterial life does.) Now intelligent life. There might only be 30 billion planets with technical civilizations in the universe. First of all, intelligence has to evolve. When you think about it, life has been around for 3.7 billion years. In that time, modern humans have only been around for about 150,000 years. Of that time, we have only been capable of sending and recieving radio signals in intersteller distances for 40 years. Most likely we will annihilate ourselves with antimatter weapons in the next 10,000 years.
For a planet with multicellular life, lets say 1 in 10 will develop intelligent life at some point. And probably many of these intelligent creatures won't develop radio. And those that do will probably only have a radio civilization lastling less than 10,000 years.
So lets see: In our galaxy, 1 in every 100 stars has an earthlike planet. Half of these have life. So 1 in every 200 systems has life. 10% of these have multicellular life, so 1 in 2,000. 10% of these have had intelligent life at some point, 1 in 2,000,000. Say 1 in five of these develop a radio civilization, so 1 in ten million. If radio civilzations last an average of 10,000 years, there is one radio civilization currently for every 5 billion stars. So there may be several in our galaxy. But communicating with them is probably pointless because they would most likely be thousands of lightyears away.
Actually, pulsejets don't need forward speed to start. A pulsejet is a combustion chamber with one-way reed valves on the front end. All you do is spray fuel into the combustion chamber and ignite. The fuel explodes. The pressure causes the front reed valves to close, therefore making the explosion blow out the back only, creating thrust.
This happens at many hundreds of times a second, each time the reed valves opening to admit new air and the fuel gets sprayed in. Pulsejets are simple but inneficient and very, very, very loud. They sound somwhat like a two cycle engine with 100 more decibels.
Ramjets are just basically tubes where fuel is burned under compression from moving air. Ramjets need to be going at least a few hundred miles per hour to work well. The plus side is that ramjets are very efficient and can travel very fast, up to mach five. (The limit for turbojets is about mach 2.5. The SR 71 accomplished mach 3 by turning off it's turbines and only using the afterburner, basically turning it into a ramjet)
A ramjet can only get to Mach 5-7 because the air needs to be slowed down to subsonic speeds. This is usualy accomplished with a supersonic conical diffuser, which slows and compresses the air. (Compressed air is slowed down at supersonic speeds) After mach 6, the engine encounters severe aerodynamic problems when slowing down the air.
For speeds from Mach 5-30, you need a Scramjet, or supersonic combustion ramjet. These burn fuel travelling through the engine at supersonic speeds. They are fast and efficient like ramjets. But they have to be going mach 4 to start working.
So a dream aircraft would be one that has combo ramjet-scramjet engine with a retractable reed-valve cover for to convert it to a pulsejet. Such a craft could gain altitude, then go into a dive, getting to low supersonic speeds where the ramjet would begin to work, accelerating it to scramjet speeds.
Such a craft would be able to fly into orbit without the need for rockets.
Rocket engines are much more powerful, lighter, and more efficient (bizarely enough.)
You're correct on the powerful and lighter part. But rockets are far less efficient in the atmosphere than jets. Rockets get a maximum specific impulse of 500, while jets can get 5,000.
Jets are inherently more efficient because they don't need oxidiser and most of the working mass is air.
Yes the DMCA sucks, but so does having your plane crash because some "rocket man" happened to launch a small missile into the flight-path of one of its engine intakes at the wrong time.
The chances of that happening are very infestimal. Airspace is a big area. He will be crossing the 25-40 thousand foot range of commercial flights for probably less than a minute. He is launching in a remote part of Eastern Oregon where jets don't even cross. So anyway, let's say a jet crosses somewhere in the Alvord Desert every hour (an overestimate). The Alvord Desert is about a 30 by 15 mile salt flat area between a huge desert mountain and another desert area. So anyway, the total area is about 450 square miles. A jet would cross it in less than two minutes. A jet takes up a volume of air say 150 x 150 x 30. That is 675 thousand ft 3. The total volume of air from the 25-40 thousand foot level over the Alvord desert is 188 trillion cubic feet. At any point in time, the jet is taking up 1 279 billionth of the airspace in the Alvord Desert.
The chances of the rocket hitting a passing jet are one in over 100 trillion. The chances of it hitting a habitated area are one in infinity, because there are no habitated areas anywhere in the rocket's range.
For those of you not in the know, the rocket guy is launching in the Alvord Desert near Steens Mountain, Eastern Oregon.
Eastern Oregon is a desolate desert area that makes Nevada look like Manhattan. It is so desolate that the nearest town is Frenchglen, 35 air miles away with a population of 25. The nearest town of over 500 is Burns, which is over 100 miles away. The rocket isn't going near any populated area. The FAA shouldn't worry.
Rocket man trying to buy life insurance:
Insurance guy: "Age?"
Rocket Guy: "41."
"Do you smoke?"
"Nope"
"Any major health problems, or diseases in your family?"
"Nope"
"Do you build and fly manned homemade rockets?"
"Yes."
"Ohhh. Thats gonna cost ya."
If you have a watch that has glowing hands (not the indiglo kind), you use tritium yourself.
The watch dials and stuff are painted with phosporus. An ultra-small amount of tritium provides neutrons to get the phosphorus to glow.
Raduim used to be used for watches. Now it has mostly moved to tritium.
Actually, everyone already has cancer genes already hardwired into their genetic code. Why? Who knows. Maybe to limit our lifespans so we don't burden our children.
Cancer is caused when a few of these cancer-protein producing genes are turned on mutations. These genes then begin to pump out proteins, producing a useless, immortal, rapidly reproducing cancer cell.
This is really a weird. When you think about it, AoTC and Spiderman are both competing for the same market (Gen-x geeks). It's nice to see that a movie actually won out over a Star Wars movie. I liked AoTC, but Spiderman was even better.
Now, I dissagree with Katz: Spiderman was hyped even more than AoTC.
He has bought a Russian pressure suit. As for engine failure, he is buying commercial peroxide rockets, which are very reliable due to their monoproppelent simplicity. The rocket is very unlikely to fail.
The usual boundary for space is 50 miles, just below minimum low earth orbit. Other than regular rockets, only the X-15 Rocket Plane has reached this height.
I need my KB at exactly the right height, also. In addition, I like to have one of those removable KB foam pads. I had the kind that are installed with KB's. Those suck. Anyway, these foam pads give me some place to rest my wrists, so I don't have to constantly have them bent to rest them on my desk.
Ergonomic KBs are hard to type with and they just make my pain worse.
I use Opera, and I am not familiar with these "pop-up windows" of which you speak.
I know I shouldn't feed the trolls. But, I cannot resist.
Whether or not he's a moron, he's still smarter than you
Bush is an idiot. The only reason he does a good job at the seat of president is that he has a few good advisors (ie. Sec. of Defense Rumsfield). I'd say, with his advisors, Bush is fairly good at foreign policy, while (with the likes of Ashcroft) his domestic policy sucks. Bush is an idiot however.
The insulin your son gets does not come from harvested embryos, and no one is objecting to it.
Stem cells for diabetics are used for the pancreas, so the diabetic can produce his own insulin like a normal person.
Stem cells are really the future of medicine, if our idiotic leaders will allow it. When an artery is clogged or the kidneys are failing, you can just have them replaced with the aid of stem cells and very advanced surgical techniques. This could extend human lifespan past 100 years. But, as it's looking today with our esteemed President Bush, I am beginning to wonder if we will ever have stem cells.
Gattaca was one of the best movies I've ever seen. It's not a *yawn*! Some people expect all Sci-fi flicks to be action packed, with lots of spaceships and lasers, like Star Wars. Well, Gattaca is more of an art movie like Citizen Kane. Kane is not action packed but it is considered the best movie ever made.
Gattaca provided a very good, realistic view of th future. It is what Sci-fi movies should be like.
I think GATTACA is #1, with 2001 #2, and Blade Runner coming in third. I think Star Wars is down the list. Star Wars is a good exciting popcorn flick but it is not really such a great movie.
I like Castro.
Let's see: He has a stable government, provides all the basic needs for his citizens (they have better medical care than we do), and, lately, he has been very friendly toward the US. That is much better than many other countries in the Carribean that are full of starving, repressed people.
I believe the only thing holding Cuba back from becoming by far the richest country in the Carribean is our embargo. It should be lifted.
I may completely piss you off on this one
But many unstable countries need harsh dictatorships so they don't plunge into chaos. So what if a dictator kills 3,000 political enemies? That can prevent the death of tens of thousands by preventing the government from being overthrown and the country plunged into a bloody civil war. Sometimes you have to sacrifice a few to save many. Many countries (ie Nigeria) are simply incapable of having a steady democracy like we enjoy. Their only option is a strong dictatorship.
it is in the US where a "chip" (when you can get them) is called a french fry.
Since when have us USians called french fries chips!? Here, we call them fries.