In this case they could cheat -- the two stars are orbitting each other fairly rapidly compared to the planets orbital period. They could see them alternately passing behind the planet. You would be able to see the phase shift in the light dip and from that you can deduce the orbital speed of the planet. Other clues from ground based observation would confirm the planet and allow its mass to be determined.
yeah, tipping the globe in the direction of a mini ice age might be an issue... But you've got to make up your mind: Do you want it hot or do you want it cold.
Sure it will. If it has the effect of immediately dropping the global temperature 2C by increasing the albedo, then the problem induced by past CO2 emissions is mitigated.
Well... knew that. I expect there will be habitation of arctic areas in both hemispheres, "uninhabitable" desert regions, and open the ocean before we actually go so far as to colonize space. Energy isn't a problem on Earth with nuclear, hydro (tidal), incident solar, and geothermal energy sources. It will be a while before we run out of options.
It's an immensely complex and therefore expensive task to send even a small group of people into space. I'm not a pie-in-the-sky space nut. Colonizing with large populations (100's of people) would be highly unlikely within the next few generations. Better make that centuries. The need to be able to manufacture everything you need to survive, alone, makes colonizing space damn near impossible. And for what it's worth, when I say space, I'm only talking about inner solar system out to maybe Jupiter. Even that stretches beyond creditable based on current technology. Maybe I'll be proven wrong on that point.
Still, point was, I was surprised the forum had gone on for as long as it had and no one had suggestioned space colonization. It'll happen eventually, perhaps only in a limited form, but it will happen. That is, if we don't kill ourselves off first. Give it a few hundred years...
I'm surprised no one's brought it up: solution (it's not a simple one) is colonization of space. Yeah, yeah it'd be cheaper to have a planet wide war, and many would die in the process. A lot of resources would be used up initially. It moves the population off of Earth though, doesn't it.
But there's an awful lot of dark in Alaska in the winter, when power requirements are likely to be higher. Unfortunately, hydro would have to contend with heavy ice in the winter, which is why I left it at tidal.
In Alaska, would solar be a good choice for sustainable energy? Or would wind and tidal (hydro) power be more relevant? I think a small wind turbine would be a better choice for your demo.
It's going to be a real problem when the Klingons show up for real, and claim ownership of that name and then hold the entire planet responsible for violating the trademark.
WM has taken a real green bend lately -- generating power from landfill gas, etc. If you could show them how to generate electricity (and money) from space junk removal, they might bite.
Slashdot Mirror
In this case they could cheat -- the two stars are orbitting each other fairly rapidly compared to the planets orbital period. They could see them alternately passing behind the planet. You would be able to see the phase shift in the light dip and from that you can deduce the orbital speed of the planet. Other clues from ground based observation would confirm the planet and allow its mass to be determined.
yeah, tipping the globe in the direction of a mini ice age might be an issue... But you've got to make up your mind: Do you want it hot or do you want it cold.
Why use an artificial volcano. Just wake up one of the slumbering super volcanoes and be done with it...
Then make more. Nothing's stopping you from making more helium. All you need to do is squash a couple of hydrogen nuclei together and you have helium.
Sure it will. If it has the effect of immediately dropping the global temperature 2C by increasing the albedo, then the problem induced by past CO2 emissions is mitigated.
Moving a full refrigerator through a destroyed house while trying to avoid seeping goo of unknown composition is where it gets interesting.
By "interesting" I assume you meant "frightening"
but it is a Beowulf...
You're older. That and LCD, LED and plasma TV's don't have flyback transformers.
Star Trek also said WWIII occured before first contact...
Google chose the site for one of it's data centers to take advantage of a hydro power plant that had formerly supplied an aluminum foundry.
Well... knew that. I expect there will be habitation of arctic areas in both hemispheres, "uninhabitable" desert regions, and open the ocean before we actually go so far as to colonize space. Energy isn't a problem on Earth with nuclear, hydro (tidal), incident solar, and geothermal energy sources. It will be a while before we run out of options.
It's an immensely complex and therefore expensive task to send even a small group of people into space. I'm not a pie-in-the-sky space nut. Colonizing with large populations (100's of people) would be highly unlikely within the next few generations. Better make that centuries. The need to be able to manufacture everything you need to survive, alone, makes colonizing space damn near impossible. And for what it's worth, when I say space, I'm only talking about inner solar system out to maybe Jupiter. Even that stretches beyond creditable based on current technology. Maybe I'll be proven wrong on that point.
Still, point was, I was surprised the forum had gone on for as long as it had and no one had suggestioned space colonization. It'll happen eventually, perhaps only in a limited form, but it will happen. That is, if we don't kill ourselves off first. Give it a few hundred years...
I'm surprised no one's brought it up: solution (it's not a simple one) is colonization of space. Yeah, yeah it'd be cheaper to have a planet wide war, and many would die in the process. A lot of resources would be used up initially. It moves the population off of Earth though, doesn't it.
But there's an awful lot of dark in Alaska in the winter, when power requirements are likely to be higher. Unfortunately, hydro would have to contend with heavy ice in the winter, which is why I left it at tidal.
That's what I expected wrt solar. Given the choices wind and hydro certainly seem like better options.
In Alaska, would solar be a good choice for sustainable energy? Or would wind and tidal (hydro) power be more relevant? I think a small wind turbine would be a better choice for your demo.
Well, according to Netcraft, 15% of the web is run on IIS. That's potentially a lot of insanity.
Requiring a Windows environment to compile a OS is like using dirty energy to produce clean energy.
But... Windows is compiled in a Windows environment...
Not unusual for the major scientific journals to require payment if you don't have a membership.
It's going to be a real problem when the Klingons show up for real, and claim ownership of that name and then hold the entire planet responsible for violating the trademark.
WM has taken a real green bend lately -- generating power from landfill gas, etc. If you could show them how to generate electricity (and money) from space junk removal, they might bite.
I've just realized what's missing where I work (besided job satisfaction). Vodka fountains and a stock of whiskey.
But clouds fall out of the sky as rain...
yay hurricane season, exciting! *gets popcorn* great to be a european!
Keep it up buddy and we'll shut down the Gulf Stream and stop sending you all that heat, then see how you like dealing with an ice age...
Excellent. It will hold in the water and guarantee the servers are all soaked thoroughly!
None. It was only Soylent Green.