Okay, trained actors can sniff out trained actors. All my actor friends, even those that love Macs themselves, know without even a glimmer of a doubt, that most if not all of those "switchers" on the Mac commericials are fellow actors. Voice inflections, presence, all the little nuances that go into actor: they're all there. So, YES, they are actors. Perhaps they are acting out real testimonials, that can be debated, but they are actors.
Honestly, and with the whole gravity wobble thing and, with currently technology, for the most part we can only detect large Jupiter sized or similiar moons, which tend to be giant gas planet unsuitable for life as we know it.
So, in other words, big whoop, what's it to me?
Of course, as soon as you jumped off the satellite, you'd float off into an orbit around the earth until you finally began reentry and burned to a crisp.... but, hey, some parties are just like that, you know?
Okay, rehashing somewhat of an idea posted earlier but with a different spin:
The idea has always been that we could generate trillions and trillions of watts of power by harvesting solar power directly from space through satellites the problem being that we lack an efficient method of sending said power from the satellite down to the Earth where it could be used.
So, what's stopping us from, if this technology succeeds, from sending the energy straight down cables like the one theoretically to be used to haul up more space junk? Wouldn't that be an even BIGGER boon to the world?
Two notes:
First of all, it would still take an enormous amount of speed/energy to escape the overwhelming force of earth's gravity. Not really worth it in the long run to use this to try to give it "speed".
Second, on the subject of swingbys:
Swingby's do, in fact, increase an objects speed. And they do, in deed, steal rotational momentum from a planet in order to do so. So, hypothetically speaking, it's possible to send enough swingbys past a planet to eventually make it stop revolving (the total mass of the spaceships would have to something like the mass of the planet itself).
Just some notes. Discuss.
Actually, from studying fellow students' design projects and college and doing a little reading myself, that IS the main problem: the cables snap (theoretically speaking) under their own weight. The only way this technology can be feasible is the development of superstrong, superlight, flexible material which, as I as I know, doesn't quite exist yet.
Too elliptical? How do you define that? Besides, if they are orbiting the sun, chances are, they will all have similar ellipitical orbits with the sun at one of the foci. The only thing that can change that and make it "more elliptical" would be to add tremendous amounts of speed (ie. comets).
Can we PLEASE get on with the business of trying to, I don't know, learn stuff and stop trying to damn every damn ball of ice out there with your own personal politically correct name referring to an oppressed peoples?
Let's turn Hubble around and point it at something like Jennifer Love Hewitt or something....
I actually heard about that company when I was out on the West Coast a month ago. Apparently, they're almost ready to allow people to "ship" various goods to the moon in preparation for an actually flight/vacation to the moon concievably in the next decade.
What puzzled me was their emphasis on dumping off chairs on the first trip.... Do they know something we don't know?
I disagree. Unfortunately, I don't have the figures in front of me to verify (Being an unemployed aerospace engineer leads me little time to calculate) but that mere 200 km/h will give you a few more kg's of cargo capacity which is, to completely UNDERSTATE my point, worth its weight in platinum.... You can always BUILD an infrastructure... you can only lift up so much matter, however, at a time....
Well, yes, it IS difficult to shoot down such a fast moving object (by the way, Mach numbers are actually meaningly in space considering the fact that sound doesn't move in space), but wouldn't it make more sense, if they are firing nukes from the US, that they just use something like... I dunno... TRUCKS?
Niche that doesn't exist? Try business machines. Corporations tend to buy PC's in bulk, very generically equipped, and spread them around. Maybe one person needs business presentation quality graphics and maybe another simply needs some spreadsheet number crunching. Your giving them, with this semi-higher powered onboard video, a mid range option that is easier to maintain and falls along the corporate view that "once it is obsolete, donate it to a nonprofit" (ie. upgrading is not an option).
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, trained actors can sniff out trained actors. All my actor friends, even those that love Macs themselves, know without even a glimmer of a doubt, that most if not all of those "switchers" on the Mac commericials are fellow actors. Voice inflections, presence, all the little nuances that go into actor: they're all there. So, YES, they are actors. Perhaps they are acting out real testimonials, that can be debated, but they are actors.
Honestly, and with the whole gravity wobble thing and, with currently technology, for the most part we can only detect large Jupiter sized or similiar moons, which tend to be giant gas planet unsuitable for life as we know it. So, in other words, big whoop, what's it to me?
Of course, as soon as you jumped off the satellite, you'd float off into an orbit around the earth until you finally began reentry and burned to a crisp.... but, hey, some parties are just like that, you know?
Okay, rehashing somewhat of an idea posted earlier but with a different spin: The idea has always been that we could generate trillions and trillions of watts of power by harvesting solar power directly from space through satellites the problem being that we lack an efficient method of sending said power from the satellite down to the Earth where it could be used. So, what's stopping us from, if this technology succeeds, from sending the energy straight down cables like the one theoretically to be used to haul up more space junk? Wouldn't that be an even BIGGER boon to the world?
Two notes: First of all, it would still take an enormous amount of speed/energy to escape the overwhelming force of earth's gravity. Not really worth it in the long run to use this to try to give it "speed". Second, on the subject of swingbys: Swingby's do, in fact, increase an objects speed. And they do, in deed, steal rotational momentum from a planet in order to do so. So, hypothetically speaking, it's possible to send enough swingbys past a planet to eventually make it stop revolving (the total mass of the spaceships would have to something like the mass of the planet itself). Just some notes. Discuss.
Actually, from studying fellow students' design projects and college and doing a little reading myself, that IS the main problem: the cables snap (theoretically speaking) under their own weight. The only way this technology can be feasible is the development of superstrong, superlight, flexible material which, as I as I know, doesn't quite exist yet.
Too elliptical? How do you define that? Besides, if they are orbiting the sun, chances are, they will all have similar ellipitical orbits with the sun at one of the foci. The only thing that can change that and make it "more elliptical" would be to add tremendous amounts of speed (ie. comets).
Planet Envy. Fear it!
How about finding organic material on space debris? That would also have to top Mr. Tenth Ice Ball.
Can we PLEASE get on with the business of trying to, I don't know, learn stuff and stop trying to damn every damn ball of ice out there with your own personal politically correct name referring to an oppressed peoples? Let's turn Hubble around and point it at something like Jennifer Love Hewitt or something....
I actually heard about that company when I was out on the West Coast a month ago. Apparently, they're almost ready to allow people to "ship" various goods to the moon in preparation for an actually flight/vacation to the moon concievably in the next decade. What puzzled me was their emphasis on dumping off chairs on the first trip.... Do they know something we don't know?
I disagree. Unfortunately, I don't have the figures in front of me to verify (Being an unemployed aerospace engineer leads me little time to calculate) but that mere 200 km/h will give you a few more kg's of cargo capacity which is, to completely UNDERSTATE my point, worth its weight in platinum.... You can always BUILD an infrastructure... you can only lift up so much matter, however, at a time....
Well, yes, it IS difficult to shoot down such a fast moving object (by the way, Mach numbers are actually meaningly in space considering the fact that sound doesn't move in space), but wouldn't it make more sense, if they are firing nukes from the US, that they just use something like... I dunno... TRUCKS?
Niche that doesn't exist? Try business machines. Corporations tend to buy PC's in bulk, very generically equipped, and spread them around. Maybe one person needs business presentation quality graphics and maybe another simply needs some spreadsheet number crunching. Your giving them, with this semi-higher powered onboard video, a mid range option that is easier to maintain and falls along the corporate view that "once it is obsolete, donate it to a nonprofit" (ie. upgrading is not an option).