a couple percent in Germany, 0% in Ireland. Go figure.
Fuck you man. Has anyone ever tested 100% of the population of Ireland for this? Or even 1%? I've never even heard of it, and I live here, you'd think something like that would have been noted. So instead you're spouting racist bullshit, oho, yes, look at all the drunk paddies, harhar. Racist prick. How the hell does fat like this get modded up?
I'll give you one. I have an idea to get into space as cheaply as a space elevator, with materials and technology we have now, I even know who would pay for its design and construction. I submitted it to slashdot as a story about a month back, but its still in the pending queue (presumably waiting for the right stories to come along). I might have to just spill it if its not posted soon, tis burning a hole in me brain. However thats neither here nor there.
Space has got vast, essentially unlimited resources. One recent story pointed out the trillion dollar iron asteroid up there. The thing has about 5 tons of steel for every man, woman and child on earth. And thats just one of god knows how many... billions more?
Once we leap the cost to escape hurdle (as I think I have managed), we can proceed to use these resources. There are several obstacles in the way of this, first of which is zero gee mining, we have no idea how to do it. We can either mine the ore out there, or bring the asteroid back into orbit and slice it up there. Or slice it up and send it back to orbit. I would be opposed to moving it back into orbit for processing, purely for the debris issue. Perhaps a lunar base would have some merit there.
So we set up a mining and processing operation either on the moon or in deep orbit, and start cutting and processing one of those bad boys. Whats the first thing we build? A bigger processing and mining operation. Space exploration, much like the internet, has to be a largely incestuous affair at first, existing solely for its own benefit.
Once we have that mastered, we can move to algae pods in orbit for food production, oxygen refining, and fuel production (biodiesel or chemical engines), all of which can be powered by the immense energy of the sun, and use the raw materials abundantly available in space. Whether you ship that stuff back to earth or use it for further colonisation, its a vital step.
The production of automated scouts is also a high priority; a vast amount of surveyor and prospector drones to sweep and map every square inch of every rock and gas in the system, out to the Oort cloud, and figure out what they are made of. I'd err on the side of quantity rather than quality, still no reason not to have either. This could be combined with deep space observatories that would make hubble look like the end of a coke bottle.
So now we have a manufacturing bridgehead, a good idea of what's interesting out there, and a cheap means to launch to orbit. Actual manned system ships would come next, to either colonise or investigate the system. The rest, as they say, is (future) history.
A lot of this would require automation, robotics, right up to the point when we build a larger manufactory from the orginal small one. Robots would also look after a great deal of the exploration and colonisation, remote drones, no intelligence required. Once bare neccessities were covered, science stations, pharma research labs, the lot, could go up there.
The implications for life on earth are fascinating. We are talking about an essentially endless supply of food, medicines, and all the comforts of home, being supplied at ultimately no cost, due to high automation. It would be next to impossible to to charge actual money for anything but services, and a lot of these would be ultimately automated anyway. I would predict a golden age, as history shows us when a group of people no longer have to worry about food and survival, they tend to educate themselves. One example is ancient greece, where massive slavery (90% of the population?) removes worldy worries from the ruling class. The result was a tremendous amount of culture and technology being created in a short time.
I read your post three times, and I'm still at a loss as to what exactly your point is. I mean, I don't think its trolling, more burbling. When a nation is at war, a nation declares war, officially. Until you do so, you have no right to claim you are at war with anyone.
Zero.
This has not been done, and you can't declare war on an idea in any case. Oh and by the way, if you want to complain about terrorists hiding in the population, maybe you should go on a tour of Iran, whose current theocratic rulers were installed by the US government (and wasn't Saddam trained by the US?). And the rest of the meddling that resulted the conditions that lead to that whole plane/building incident. I mean, if a foreign government was to interfere in your government, wouldn't you be kinda pissed?
Still not to worry, the US is safe from that. Its not like the current dynasty of rulers of the US have close ties with oil sheiks in Saudi Arabia, or have received massive funding from same, or they might want to buy out your ports or anything. Heheh.
There was an Authorization for Use of Military Force. There's no practical difference.
Whoa there cowboy, you are flat out wrong in that. A declaration of war means all sort of international treaties get invoked, including conventions about the treatment of enemy combatants. If you don't declare war, you can do pretty much what you like. Thats why the US hasn't been officially at war with anyone since, what, Vietnam? Was that even an official war? Or just an intervention of some sort? If you want to open concentration camps without breaking international treaties, just don't declare war. Simple really.
Still you can take a stagnant sort of comfort in the fact that governments around the world pull this sort of stunt all the time, so you're in good company. Things like not declaring certain situations in Africa "genocide", and therefore avoiding the protocols that kick in requiring intervention, and avoiding getting stuck in an unprofitable struggle. I mean, where's the profit in stopping slaughter?
And its not like symantec have a vested interest in making out that apple is insecure so they can sell more dody AV and firewall products, or anything...
And thus ends your lesson in seeing over the borders of your own country, which can be pretty hard in a country where less then 10% posses a passport and has ever left the country
And thus begins your lesson in reading.sigs, coward...
I suggest we FIGHT to restrict the supply of Engineers and scientists, and not whinge about there not being enough.
Oh yeah, good idea, why not form a guild while you're at it? With grisly punishments for anyone that lets guild secrets out, restrictive admissions to keep out the riff raff, and your very own club secret handshake! That worked well in the middle ages, keeping them, well, medieval.
Heres a nice article I wrote
on that very issue, and this got mass media publication baby, not just a blog. Ireland removed the voting machines by the way.
More of a businessman than a scientist, for my money... anyway you must concede the point; a large portion of the population of Sweden, you too would hit like a bagful of hammers.
Sweden I salute you, you have given us many busty blonde women, with a reputation for high intelligence, and many scientists. Err. Some scientists. There must be one, at least. Sigh. Anyway be quiet you, we kicked your arses back in 9AD, and you're just still sore abut it.
Oh and by the way, I have a longer direct traceable line of noble blood than your monarchs in my own family, whatever that means.
True, our queen performs mostly a ceremonial role, if she would mingle too much in politics we'd quickly be a republic, but we still a monarchy.
No, you're in a democracy or republic or whatever. Just because you have mobile waxworks for the tourists doesn't mean you are in any way but name a monarchy.
Is the up modding it received, (currently at 5 insightful) and the lack of upmodding to the responses. Have you ever lived under a proper monarchy? Have you any idea besides what the legends of king arthur tell you what that entails? Speaking as someone from Ireland, not so long ago my country was the orginator of such terms as "scorched earth policy", "coffin ships", and "lynching". All because whatever inbred monkey that happened to be sitting on the metal chair took a fit and decided that was a good way to go this season.
You want to wake up, son. Monarchies are never meritocracies, the best does not rise to the top. The wealthy have their status codified and secured by law, enforced by the willing peons that were beggared by the noble classes themselves, but are too ill educated to see it, again due to the noble classes.
The longest-lived systems are more along the lines of emperial monarchies, whose lines can stretch for millenia
Good lord. You say this like its a good thing. The advances in science and living conditions made in primarily western nations that gave us what we have today were made when..? Thats right, in the last 200 years. Seeing the connection yet? Just because some thugs can settle into hereditary positions and bully the rest of the population for a few millenia with hired heavies doesn't make it smart or right. Still with me? Good lad. The longest lived systems are only stable from the top. And even then not very stable.
As I was saying, the scariest thing about this post is the agreement I see with it. Its like you americans have forgotten what it was like. Does anyone doubt that a lot of people in the US today would mind living under a monarchy? Yeesh.
No, they really didn't, and even today remain vehemently opposed to the idea... FTFA:
The international trading tradition created a feeling that the United Kingdom was separate from 'mainland Europe' and there was opposition from many people who thought that conceding power to any outside body meant loss of national sovereignty.....However, it was not long before Britain realised that it risked economic and political isolation if it remained outside the Community, although it was ten years and several negotiations before Britain actually became a member in 1973.
And lets not forget, the legal tender there is still pounds, unlike every other nation in the EU.
In the end, the UK told their Empire to go bugger off
NO need for the UK to control Ireland since the 18th century
And what about the seven centuries before that? Even before there was a UK? In the grand scheme of things the spanish armada was just a footnote, the British have always had an interest in Ireland.
and used Scotish Presbyterian settlers to kick the Irish off their land.
Plantation was Elizabeth's work, and yes thats where all the troubles started. See above for the strategic value or lack thereof of Ireland.
You don't think the IRA started in 1921 do you? No, they've been around since the 1700s
The IRA was previously the IRB, Brotherhood, a much larger group who said they wouldn't rise up unles the English took away their arms, and who were only involved in 1916 because of shenanigans. And before that you had the fenians, the whiteboys, an endless list really. The IRA proper, from which the current IRA claims direct descent, only started in the war of independance, 1921 or thereabouts. And sinn fein was only a minor faction at that time, they rode the coat tails of the war there. Are you trying to teach me my own history? (check the sig)
Actually, the UK is negotiating a date to hand it over- and the IRA already got an election out of the deal
Er no, the UK isn't negotiating any such date, they are clinging on to the ragged remnants of their empire with the strength of senility. I notice you said that people from the south would move north if there was a handover - I have to say I find that unlikely. We're merrily prospering here thanks, we don't need to join those lunatics.
As the airline pilot said setting down at Belfast airport, "set your watches to local time please, 1700 AD"...
The IRA merely wanted Ireland- and since the war with Spain ended, Ireland's usefullness as strategic property has been gone, it was easy to give the IRA what they wanted.
wut. What war with spain? The last time the UK was at war with spain was, christ, the 18th century? Ireland was never useful as a strategic property, unless you planned to invade the US or something. And the IRA only fought over the north; the south, and vast majority, is completely free. And it still remains in UK hands, so the IRA didn't get what they wanted.
So tell us the truth, is the absinthe kicking in yet?
Also, the tactics Islamic terrorists use make the IRA (who routeinely warned the police to evacuate before the bomb went off) look like newborn kittens. Sorry to bust your Irish pride.
Er the goal wasn't to kill English people, because that gets you invaded. The IRA could have dropped half the politicians in the UK if it took their fancy. The goal was to prevent further atrocities like the bloody sunday massacre, and restore some kind of equality of rights in the north between the catholics and the protestants.
And if blowing people up is a source of pride for you, I'm sure that you can find gainful employment somewhere like pakistan, along the border there.
Especially if you consider how little money they get
NASA got 16.2 billion dollars for 2005. Give me 16.2 billion dollars and I'll get us up to 12 escape velocity launches a day, with beer and pizza money left over. Watch this space, I submitted a story about it lately, and to my surprise it wasn't rejected out of hand, but is in the pending queue...
Just because downtown Manila is very well wired (and wireless)
Oho one more nit to pick, its not. Manila is the closest I have ever seen to hell on earth, if you will excuse the melodrama. I suppose it depends on your district, but even the nicer spots have places like smoke mountain adjacent.
It was survivors of the mudslide who said that the logging in the hills above their village is what caused the mudslide.
Not to nitpick here, but my girlfriend lives an hour away from the mudslide on Leyte, and the problem was coconut trees with shallow roots, not illegal logging, apparently. The use of land is alright, as far as I know, it was just bad luck more than anything else. Oh and living under the shadow of a mountain of mud. Shitty thing to happen though. The flood in Ormuc next door to this mess a few years back was caused by illegal logging, AFAIK.
Can't see them burning cow dung mind you; there aren't too many cows (except the local mini water buffalo, carabao), cow ownership is a rich mans game, relatively speaking. They do burn a lot of household trash, however. If this inventor can come up with a way to deal with the damned mosquitoes and the malaria they bring, hes got my vote for king of the world...
Bah, I never let sober practicality get in the way of a good line of thought. One is a question of logistics, the other a question of physics. While we may or may not ever achieve the required physics, we can certainly achieve the required logistics, right now. How far ahead would this project get with say, a couple of years of the combined budget of the US military? I'd say that would nearly finish it... And who would be insane enough to commit that much money? Why, anyone that wanted to control space and its infinite resources of course!:D
Okay, so you'd need 11,100 m/s for escape velocity, either triple the launch ramp length or triple the Gs, or meet somewhere in the middle. Not impossible, I'd say. Given that a nuclear power plant might put out 3-4 MWe if you have a decent sized one, and also the fact that you aren't trying to apply that energy all in one single burst, we have a possible and workable solution.:D Thats about 185 miles long, again I'm missing out on height, gravity, and gradient issues, but to tap the limitless resources of space, yes I'd say it would be a worthy investment. And somewhat more workable than a space elevator at this time.
An important question is, how fast can we accelerate? Accelerations of short duration (under perhaps 200 milliseconds) do not involve significant fluid shifts within the body, nor do they involve the various reflex responses that can affect responses to longer duration acceleration. Depending on the time that is spend under high acceleration, people can withstand extreme g-foreces. Depending on the individual's "g-tolerance" the oxygen supply to the head stops completely at 5 to 6 g resulting in unconsciousness, G-LOC. So we'd really need about a 200km takeoff platform
Well maybe its crazy, but lets think crazy for a minute. Just how hard would it be to put four or five nuclear power plants powering an evacuated tube with a pulley or rail system run up a gradiated tower or pyramid 40, 50, or 100km in height, more than sufficient to clear serious atmo and its associated problems, and launch ships into a viable orbit? I know nuclear blasts are plenty to get a ship orbital, I can't recall the name of the project but some very smart people worked it out, and apparently it's doable. How realistic is it to propose such a construction and given the cost of current launches, and their 1+ year run up time for a single launch, as opposed to the daily or hourly launches this would enable?
Slashdot Mirror
a couple percent in Germany, 0% in Ireland. Go figure.
Fuck you man. Has anyone ever tested 100% of the population of Ireland for this? Or even 1%? I've never even heard of it, and I live here, you'd think something like that would have been noted. So instead you're spouting racist bullshit, oho, yes, look at all the drunk paddies, harhar. Racist prick. How the hell does fat like this get modded up?
Which is why it makes no sense (technological or economic) for people to go there.
I profoundly disagree.
I'll give you one. I have an idea to get into space as cheaply as a space elevator, with materials and technology we have now, I even know who would pay for its design and construction. I submitted it to slashdot as a story about a month back, but its still in the pending queue (presumably waiting for the right stories to come along). I might have to just spill it if its not posted soon, tis burning a hole in me brain. However thats neither here nor there.
Space has got vast, essentially unlimited resources. One recent story pointed out the trillion dollar iron asteroid up there. The thing has about 5 tons of steel for every man, woman and child on earth. And thats just one of god knows how many... billions more?
Once we leap the cost to escape hurdle (as I think I have managed), we can proceed to use these resources. There are several obstacles in the way of this, first of which is zero gee mining, we have no idea how to do it. We can either mine the ore out there, or bring the asteroid back into orbit and slice it up there. Or slice it up and send it back to orbit. I would be opposed to moving it back into orbit for processing, purely for the debris issue. Perhaps a lunar base would have some merit there.
So we set up a mining and processing operation either on the moon or in deep orbit, and start cutting and processing one of those bad boys. Whats the first thing we build? A bigger processing and mining operation. Space exploration, much like the internet, has to be a largely incestuous affair at first, existing solely for its own benefit.
Once we have that mastered, we can move to algae pods in orbit for food production, oxygen refining, and fuel production (biodiesel or chemical engines), all of which can be powered by the immense energy of the sun, and use the raw materials abundantly available in space. Whether you ship that stuff back to earth or use it for further colonisation, its a vital step.
The production of automated scouts is also a high priority; a vast amount of surveyor and prospector drones to sweep and map every square inch of every rock and gas in the system, out to the Oort cloud, and figure out what they are made of. I'd err on the side of quantity rather than quality, still no reason not to have either. This could be combined with deep space observatories that would make hubble look like the end of a coke bottle.
So now we have a manufacturing bridgehead, a good idea of what's interesting out there, and a cheap means to launch to orbit. Actual manned system ships would come next, to either colonise or investigate the system. The rest, as they say, is (future) history.
A lot of this would require automation, robotics, right up to the point when we build a larger manufactory from the orginal small one. Robots would also look after a great deal of the exploration and colonisation, remote drones, no intelligence required. Once bare neccessities were covered, science stations, pharma research labs, the lot, could go up there.
The implications for life on earth are fascinating. We are talking about an essentially endless supply of food, medicines, and all the comforts of home, being supplied at ultimately no cost, due to high automation. It would be next to impossible to to charge actual money for anything but services, and a lot of these would be ultimately automated anyway. I would predict a golden age, as history shows us when a group of people no longer have to worry about food and survival, they tend to educate themselves. One example is ancient greece, where massive slavery (90% of the population?) removes worldy worries from the ruling class. The result was a tremendous amount of culture and technology being created in a short time.
I read your post three times, and I'm still at a loss as to what exactly your point is. I mean, I don't think its trolling, more burbling. When a nation is at war, a nation declares war, officially. Until you do so, you have no right to claim you are at war with anyone.
Zero.
This has not been done, and you can't declare war on an idea in any case. Oh and by the way, if you want to complain about terrorists hiding in the population, maybe you should go on a tour of Iran, whose current theocratic rulers were installed by the US government (and wasn't Saddam trained by the US?). And the rest of the meddling that resulted the conditions that lead to that whole plane/building incident. I mean, if a foreign government was to interfere in your government, wouldn't you be kinda pissed?
Still not to worry, the US is safe from that. Its not like the current dynasty of rulers of the US have close ties with oil sheiks in Saudi Arabia, or have received massive funding from same, or they might want to buy out your ports or anything. Heheh.
There was an Authorization for Use of Military Force. There's no practical difference.
Whoa there cowboy, you are flat out wrong in that. A declaration of war means all sort of international treaties get invoked, including conventions about the treatment of enemy combatants. If you don't declare war, you can do pretty much what you like. Thats why the US hasn't been officially at war with anyone since, what, Vietnam? Was that even an official war? Or just an intervention of some sort? If you want to open concentration camps without breaking international treaties, just don't declare war. Simple really.
Still you can take a stagnant sort of comfort in the fact that governments around the world pull this sort of stunt all the time, so you're in good company. Things like not declaring certain situations in Africa "genocide", and therefore avoiding the protocols that kick in requiring intervention, and avoiding getting stuck in an unprofitable struggle. I mean, where's the profit in stopping slaughter?
So isolate noise + nullify EM fields = longer life in a war
Also the original use was not to trip mines in world war two, as far as I recall...
And its not like symantec have a vested interest in making out that apple is insecure so they can sell more dody AV and firewall products, or anything...
And thus ends your lesson in seeing over the borders of your own country, which can be pretty hard in a country where less then 10% posses a passport and has ever left the country
.sigs, coward...
And thus begins your lesson in reading
I suggest we FIGHT to restrict the supply of Engineers and scientists, and not whinge about there not being enough.
Oh yeah, good idea, why not form a guild while you're at it? With grisly punishments for anyone that lets guild secrets out, restrictive admissions to keep out the riff raff, and your very own club secret handshake! That worked well in the middle ages, keeping them, well, medieval.
Heres a nice article I wrote on that very issue, and this got mass media publication baby, not just a blog. Ireland removed the voting machines by the way.
More of a businessman than a scientist, for my money... anyway you must concede the point; a large portion of the population of Sweden, you too would hit like a bagful of hammers.
Sweden I salute you, you have given us many busty blonde women, with a reputation for high intelligence, and many scientists. Err. Some scientists. There must be one, at least. Sigh. Anyway be quiet you, we kicked your arses back in 9AD, and you're just still sore abut it.
Oh and by the way, I have a longer direct traceable line of noble blood than your monarchs in my own family, whatever that means.
True, our queen performs mostly a ceremonial role, if she would mingle too much in politics we'd quickly be a republic, but we still a monarchy.
No, you're in a democracy or republic or whatever. Just because you have mobile waxworks for the tourists doesn't mean you are in any way but name a monarchy.
Is the up modding it received, (currently at 5 insightful) and the lack of upmodding to the responses. Have you ever lived under a proper monarchy? Have you any idea besides what the legends of king arthur tell you what that entails? Speaking as someone from Ireland, not so long ago my country was the orginator of such terms as "scorched earth policy", "coffin ships", and "lynching". All because whatever inbred monkey that happened to be sitting on the metal chair took a fit and decided that was a good way to go this season.
You want to wake up, son. Monarchies are never meritocracies, the best does not rise to the top. The wealthy have their status codified and secured by law, enforced by the willing peons that were beggared by the noble classes themselves, but are too ill educated to see it, again due to the noble classes.
The longest-lived systems are more along the lines of emperial monarchies, whose lines can stretch for millenia
Good lord. You say this like its a good thing. The advances in science and living conditions made in primarily western nations that gave us what we have today were made when..? Thats right, in the last 200 years. Seeing the connection yet? Just because some thugs can settle into hereditary positions and bully the rest of the population for a few millenia with hired heavies doesn't make it smart or right. Still with me? Good lad. The longest lived systems are only stable from the top. And even then not very stable.
As I was saying, the scariest thing about this post is the agreement I see with it. Its like you americans have forgotten what it was like. Does anyone doubt that a lot of people in the US today would mind living under a monarchy? Yeesh.
They wanted to join Europe.
No, they really didn't, and even today remain vehemently opposed to the idea... FTFA:
The international trading tradition created a feeling that the United Kingdom was separate from 'mainland Europe' and there was opposition from many people who thought that conceding power to any outside body meant loss of national sovereignty.....However, it was not long before Britain realised that it risked economic and political isolation if it remained outside the Community, although it was ten years and several negotiations before Britain actually became a member in 1973.
And lets not forget, the legal tender there is still pounds, unlike every other nation in the EU.
In the end, the UK told their Empire to go bugger off
Oh okay, someone should have maybe explained that to them back in the 80s, eh?
NO need for the UK to control Ireland since the 18th century
And what about the seven centuries before that? Even before there was a UK? In the grand scheme of things the spanish armada was just a footnote, the British have always had an interest in Ireland.
and used Scotish Presbyterian settlers to kick the Irish off their land.
Plantation was Elizabeth's work, and yes thats where all the troubles started. See above for the strategic value or lack thereof of Ireland.
You don't think the IRA started in 1921 do you? No, they've been around since the 1700s
The IRA was previously the IRB, Brotherhood, a much larger group who said they wouldn't rise up unles the English took away their arms, and who were only involved in 1916 because of shenanigans. And before that you had the fenians, the whiteboys, an endless list really. The IRA proper, from which the current IRA claims direct descent, only started in the war of independance, 1921 or thereabouts. And sinn fein was only a minor faction at that time, they rode the coat tails of the war there. Are you trying to teach me my own history? (check the sig)
Actually, the UK is negotiating a date to hand it over- and the IRA already got an election out of the deal
Er no, the UK isn't negotiating any such date, they are clinging on to the ragged remnants of their empire with the strength of senility. I notice you said that people from the south would move north if there was a handover - I have to say I find that unlikely. We're merrily prospering here thanks, we don't need to join those lunatics.
As the airline pilot said setting down at Belfast airport, "set your watches to local time please, 1700 AD"...
The IRA merely wanted Ireland- and since the war with Spain ended, Ireland's usefullness as strategic property has been gone, it was easy to give the IRA what they wanted.
wut. What war with spain? The last time the UK was at war with spain was, christ, the 18th century? Ireland was never useful as a strategic property, unless you planned to invade the US or something. And the IRA only fought over the north; the south, and vast majority, is completely free. And it still remains in UK hands, so the IRA didn't get what they wanted.
So tell us the truth, is the absinthe kicking in yet?
Also, the tactics Islamic terrorists use make the IRA (who routeinely warned the police to evacuate before the bomb went off) look like newborn kittens. Sorry to bust your Irish pride.
Er the goal wasn't to kill English people, because that gets you invaded. The IRA could have dropped half the politicians in the UK if it took their fancy. The goal was to prevent further atrocities like the bloody sunday massacre, and restore some kind of equality of rights in the north between the catholics and the protestants.
And if blowing people up is a source of pride for you, I'm sure that you can find gainful employment somewhere like pakistan, along the border there.
Especially if you consider how little money they get
NASA got 16.2 billion dollars for 2005. Give me 16.2 billion dollars and I'll get us up to 12 escape velocity launches a day, with beer and pizza money left over. Watch this space, I submitted a story about it lately, and to my surprise it wasn't rejected out of hand, but is in the pending queue...
We can't even control the drug trade, and these guys think they can stop online gambling?
Drugs don't have an IP address...
Just because downtown Manila is very well wired (and wireless)
Oho one more nit to pick, its not. Manila is the closest I have ever seen to hell on earth, if you will excuse the melodrama. I suppose it depends on your district, but even the nicer spots have places like smoke mountain adjacent.
It was survivors of the mudslide who said that the logging in the hills above their village is what caused the mudslide.
Not to nitpick here, but my girlfriend lives an hour away from the mudslide on Leyte, and the problem was coconut trees with shallow roots, not illegal logging, apparently. The use of land is alright, as far as I know, it was just bad luck more than anything else. Oh and living under the shadow of a mountain of mud. Shitty thing to happen though. The flood in Ormuc next door to this mess a few years back was caused by illegal logging, AFAIK.
Can't see them burning cow dung mind you; there aren't too many cows (except the local mini water buffalo, carabao), cow ownership is a rich mans game, relatively speaking. They do burn a lot of household trash, however. If this inventor can come up with a way to deal with the damned mosquitoes and the malaria they bring, hes got my vote for king of the world...
Bah, I never let sober practicality get in the way of a good line of thought. One is a question of logistics, the other a question of physics. While we may or may not ever achieve the required physics, we can certainly achieve the required logistics, right now. How far ahead would this project get with say, a couple of years of the combined budget of the US military? I'd say that would nearly finish it... And who would be insane enough to commit that much money? Why, anyone that wanted to control space and its infinite resources of course! :D
Okay, so you'd need 11,100 m/s for escape velocity, either triple the launch ramp length or triple the Gs, or meet somewhere in the middle. Not impossible, I'd say. Given that a nuclear power plant might put out 3-4 MWe if you have a decent sized one, and also the fact that you aren't trying to apply that energy all in one single burst, we have a possible and workable solution. :D Thats about 185 miles long, again I'm missing out on height, gravity, and gradient issues, but to tap the limitless resources of space, yes I'd say it would be a worthy investment. And somewhat more workable than a space elevator at this time.
An important question is, how fast can we accelerate? Accelerations of short duration (under perhaps 200 milliseconds) do not involve significant fluid shifts within the body, nor do they involve the various reflex responses that can affect responses to longer duration acceleration. Depending on the time that is spend under high acceleration, people can withstand extreme g-foreces. Depending on the individual's "g-tolerance" the oxygen supply to the head stops completely at 5 to 6 g resulting in unconsciousness, G-LOC. So we'd really need about a 200km takeoff platform
Well maybe its crazy, but lets think crazy for a minute. Just how hard would it be to put four or five nuclear power plants powering an evacuated tube with a pulley or rail system run up a gradiated tower or pyramid 40, 50, or 100km in height, more than sufficient to clear serious atmo and its associated problems, and launch ships into a viable orbit? I know nuclear blasts are plenty to get a ship orbital, I can't recall the name of the project but some very smart people worked it out, and apparently it's doable. How realistic is it to propose such a construction and given the cost of current launches, and their 1+ year run up time for a single launch, as opposed to the daily or hourly launches this would enable?