Using such description (further away, as far as Saturn, as far as Mars) is really not accurate; and gives people some weird ideas regarding deflection. That description could fit with many comets, at most... but in the case of asteroids virtually all of the potentially dangerous ones are already "here", on nearby orbits. And what ultimately separates us from some future impact is not the distance per se, but the time & number of orbits around the Sun until the impactor and the Earth end up in the same spot.
Ignoring of course who supposedly gave us that reason; an act which to fully get appreciated would need now to be... relinquished? OK... (nice how that faith works BTW, simply dispelling taking a broader look at what it holds dear, also just on the basis of where that look is hosted). And yes, congregations and their rituals evolved to induce mystical feelings, we know that. There are much easier ways if you want those.
Yes, people are generally bastards (which is of course the most straightforward reason why their gods and organizations are, too). However, certainly when looking at all the stats of positive societal factors, there is a very strong correlation between them and levels of organic secularism in a given place. BTW I can't speak much about French Revolution or Khmer Rouge, but I had a decently intimate insight into workings of European-area Warsaw Pact - and "strangely" enough, virtually all Party members were closet Christians, their kids baptized, attending services in the country, etc. With general level of religiosity still there and, at most, regimes usually trying to introduce on top of it their new state religions.
(there's another curious correlation BTW - take a look at a world map, take note of places which are historically strongly "old" Christian; now take note of places which had major problems with "communism" - notice any interesting overlap? I suspect it boils down to continuing reverberations of strong feudalism typical of those societies; certainly some sort of continuum - you thinking how it's a case of clear opposition, how it is sensible to use it as such, is another confusion on your part similar to one pointed out by the first of linked usenet postings)
And how many believers would choose to formally break links with their church for such small (considering the eternity...) savings?
No, those people shouldn't have been counted as members a long time ago. It's just that up to know they didn't care, even despite 1.3% (hey, good for some traditional services)
Certainly not all are closet gays, but it might as well be more common than in the general population. First, I know that for some priests (can't say for how many in this case, though) it's a case of hoping for vows of chastity helping them to not sin, basically. Secondly, a buddy (himself a gay) who tried to get into monastery claims that at least 1/3rd of brethren (at this one particular monastery) also were.
As for general obsession with sexuality, it's almost certainly a matter of those practices simply improving survival of belief systems which they are part of (heh, yeah, "evil evolution" in a way). In more modern times it might, for example, take the form of: sexual forces are most powerful at the formative years of life; truly internalizing their suppression, trying hard to find the value of it, might be helpful in not going crazy. Which stays later in life, passed on, as something "normal"...
It's not too weird if one looks at their god from the perspective of dystheism, maltheism or gnosticism (if only those weren't also suppressed a long time ago as "heretics" - but hey, it's something the Demiurge would want;p )
Also, one old Usenet posting writing about it much better that I could in a reasonable amount of time. Maybe this one, too.
Never mind insane energies required for capture (unless it would be double asteroid, one part of which captured by exchange of momentum... but that's damn tricky and with huge risk of sending it directly towards the surface) - a) using it for space junk would be counterproductive, to say the least (impact with it would most likely simply create more debris, and most importantly to sweep crowded orbits it would need to be far below its Roche limit... so it would just disintegrate by itself into a field of debris) b) the resources would useful mostly only in Earth orbit / that's already quite deep gravity well.
Plus generally, there's really no need for collisions / "interplanetary billiard" (to say nothing of how many orders of magnitude harder it is to direct something to exactly where you want it instead of from where you don't want it), a miniscule nudge is enough.
I see - though I'm not sure if it would have so much time. MD stuff was too long quite expensive; making its capabilities "fuller" probably wouldn't help with that. And real uptake of small wearable digital audio players (again not limiting ourselves to looking at few atypical but highly visible markets) happened only with really low prices. In a time when it could fit nicely with growing penetration of internet access.
So, do you notice some uptake of that Nvidia "3D" glasses thing that was released one or two years ago? And BTW, head-mounted displays are insanely more headache-inducing than "3D" TVs.
http://www.fanboy.co.nz/adblock/opera/ (that functionality is available for a long time; yeah, no autoupdate - but despite very rarely updating the list, it didn't ever cause for me the need to use GUI content blocker; I'm sure you can add your 5 lines, too)
And yet, in large part of posts with "because of those extensions I can't live without", it turns out it was ignorance of features which Opera has built-in for a long time. How many times are we supposed to see "because Opera doesn't have adblock!" bs?...
No it wouldn't, asteroids typically have quite non-uniform form and rotate; which means pointing the thrusters in the optimal way (vector both going through the center of mass and in the proper direction in regards to pushing it) is not doable.
But a tug can utilize the most basic orbital mechanics, of which you are not aware (for example: in one straightforward scenario the engines would be continuously firing at 90 degrees to where the asteroid is in relation to the spacecraft, resulting in transfer of all that thrust to the asteroid. You can't imagine how? Yeah, exactly... )
Yes, because actual rocket scientists made such "obvious" omission... (really, didn't it occur to you to at least check how the proposals look / what kinds of orbital mechanics are involved?)
Correct in the physical sense obviously, but somewhere along the line I...accreted an usage where "getting out of some gravity well" is a valid description; when it no longer keeps the body captive (doesn't the name itself, "well", suggest such usage)
And yeah, delta-v for plunging something into the Sun is typically higher than one required to reach some other stars. All the more reason to ask what it meant.
Only its users? (plus next time, in turn, don't make it sound, in the first reply, like I'm also doing something like that when providing numbers and clarifying what the previously used ones mean)
PS. Again, it's perfectly possible that CIS numbers wouldn't be quite there with ads / without some specific efforts, generally; though they would probably just use cracked versions. Also, claiming that its taking off in mobile is merely due to opening of that market is dismissive at best - doesn't account for how large share they have (how they actually enabled large part the market is a reason to be less dismissive, not more)
Nukes provide just a very short impulse; transferring it to the whole rubble pile might turn out to be problematic.
Gravity tractors (and few other methods) can work months, years; and force from them works uniformly (or in the case of some other methods - very gently)
Though most should be small enough that it will make a difference. Oh well, I'm sure what's good for space-faring countries will have to be good for humanity (of course it will get really funny if 2+ of them disagree)
And this mess is pretty much inevitable - in the initial stages of deflection, a risk for some places will rise while it gets smaller for some other (luckily: the uncertainties involved should be big enough so that it won't be clear which are which)
Or solar sail. Or utilize Yarkovsky effect by spraying the object with paint and/or shading it & illuminating different parts of it (again, basically a sail). With so many possibilities, we should be fine - assuming early enough detection.
PS. Also, I'm curious, what exactly do you mean by "push it into the sun's gravity well"? It's constantly in it... virtually all the objects in our system are.
No, if early enough it doesn't require a very big mass at all, or some particularly asteroid-shattering impact (one other interesting, even if probably not particularly useful, method in the link above: centrifugal fragmentation; considering many asteroids seem to be barely held together rubble piles...)
Slashdot Mirror
Using such description (further away, as far as Saturn, as far as Mars) is really not accurate; and gives people some weird ideas regarding deflection. That description could fit with many comets, at most ... but in the case of asteroids virtually all of the potentially dangerous ones are already "here", on nearby orbits. And what ultimately separates us from some future impact is not the distance per se, but the time & number of orbits around the Sun until the impactor and the Earth end up in the same spot.
I think you overestimate how often a true insider nailing something to the Church door actually works... (I have quite curious situation here, lustration et al. ...but with the Church formally excluded)
Ignoring of course who supposedly gave us that reason; an act which to fully get appreciated would need now to be... relinquished? OK... (nice how that faith works BTW, simply dispelling taking a broader look at what it holds dear, also just on the basis of where that look is hosted). And yes, congregations and their rituals evolved to induce mystical feelings, we know that. There are much easier ways if you want those.
Yes, people are generally bastards (which is of course the most straightforward reason why their gods and organizations are, too). However, certainly when looking at all the stats of positive societal factors, there is a very strong correlation between them and levels of organic secularism in a given place. BTW I can't speak much about French Revolution or Khmer Rouge, but I had a decently intimate insight into workings of European-area Warsaw Pact - and "strangely" enough, virtually all Party members were closet Christians, their kids baptized, attending services in the country, etc. With general level of religiosity still there and, at most, regimes usually trying to introduce on top of it their new state religions.
(there's another curious correlation BTW - take a look at a world map, take note of places which are historically strongly "old" Christian; now take note of places which had major problems with "communism" - notice any interesting overlap? I suspect it boils down to continuing reverberations of strong feudalism typical of those societies; certainly some sort of continuum - you thinking how it's a case of clear opposition, how it is sensible to use it as such, is another confusion on your part similar to one pointed out by the first of linked usenet postings)
Strangely, I don't have to pay in a place on your east border... (where there are still problems with locations of crosses and where some points of the constitution are a fiction...among so many other things; it's at least partly funny)
Though supposedly needs to be done personally and with two witnesses... (yeah, I still have to go for all the trouble)
And how many believers would choose to formally break links with their church for such small (considering the eternity...) savings?
No, those people shouldn't have been counted as members a long time ago. It's just that up to know they didn't care, even despite 1.3% (hey, good for some traditional services)
Certainly not all are closet gays, but it might as well be more common than in the general population. First, I know that for some priests (can't say for how many in this case, though) it's a case of hoping for vows of chastity helping them to not sin, basically. Secondly, a buddy (himself a gay) who tried to get into monastery claims that at least 1/3rd of brethren (at this one particular monastery) also were.
As for general obsession with sexuality, it's almost certainly a matter of those practices simply improving survival of belief systems which they are part of (heh, yeah, "evil evolution" in a way). In more modern times it might, for example, take the form of: sexual forces are most powerful at the formative years of life; truly internalizing their suppression, trying hard to find the value of it, might be helpful in not going crazy. Which stays later in life, passed on, as something "normal"...
It's not too weird if one looks at their god from the perspective of dystheism, maltheism or gnosticism (if only those weren't also suppressed a long time ago as "heretics" - but hey, it's something the Demiurge would want ;p )
Also, one old Usenet posting writing about it much better that I could in a reasonable amount of time. Maybe this one, too.
Never mind insane energies required for capture (unless it would be double asteroid, one part of which captured by exchange of momentum... but that's damn tricky and with huge risk of sending it directly towards the surface) - a) using it for space junk would be counterproductive, to say the least (impact with it would most likely simply create more debris, and most importantly to sweep crowded orbits it would need to be far below its Roche limit... so it would just disintegrate by itself into a field of debris) b) the resources would useful mostly only in Earth orbit / that's already quite deep gravity well.
Plus generally, there's really no need for collisions / "interplanetary billiard" (to say nothing of how many orders of magnitude harder it is to direct something to exactly where you want it instead of from where you don't want it), a miniscule nudge is enough.
I see - though I'm not sure if it would have so much time. MD stuff was too long quite expensive; making its capabilities "fuller" probably wouldn't help with that. And real uptake of small wearable digital audio players (again not limiting ourselves to looking at few atypical but highly visible markets) happened only with really low prices. In a time when it could fit nicely with growing penetration of internet access.
So, do you notice some uptake of that Nvidia "3D" glasses thing that was released one or two years ago? And BTW, head-mounted displays are insanely more headache-inducing than "3D" TVs.
http://www.fanboy.co.nz/adblock/opera/ (that functionality is available for a long time; yeah, no autoupdate - but despite very rarely updating the list, it didn't ever cause for me the need to use GUI content blocker; I'm sure you can add your 5 lines, too)
Opera has adblock relying on provided list for a long, long time http://www.fanboy.co.nz/adblock/opera/
(no auto update; but I never had to resolve to GUI content blocker, despite only rarely updating the list)
The end result with Opera is that I don't remember ever needing to use GUI content blocker anyway, despite updating the list only semi-regularly.
And yet, in large part of posts with "because of those extensions I can't live without", it turns out it was ignorance of features which Opera has built-in for a long time. How many times are we supposed to see "because Opera doesn't have adblock!" bs?...
You're just mocking the praises of missile shield of GWB & co., and laughing how everybody lese here were taken for the ride, right?...
No it wouldn't, asteroids typically have quite non-uniform form and rotate; which means pointing the thrusters in the optimal way (vector both going through the center of mass and in the proper direction in regards to pushing it) is not doable.
But a tug can utilize the most basic orbital mechanics, of which you are not aware (for example: in one straightforward scenario the engines would be continuously firing at 90 degrees to where the asteroid is in relation to the spacecraft, resulting in transfer of all that thrust to the asteroid. You can't imagine how? Yeah, exactly... )
Forgetting about LHC so quickly, are we?... ;)
Yes, because actual rocket scientists made such "obvious" omission... (really, didn't it occur to you to at least check how the proposals look / what kinds of orbital mechanics are involved?)
Correct in the physical sense obviously, but somewhere along the line I...accreted an usage where "getting out of some gravity well" is a valid description; when it no longer keeps the body captive (doesn't the name itself, "well", suggest such usage)
And yeah, delta-v for plunging something into the Sun is typically higher than one required to reach some other stars. All the more reason to ask what it meant.
Only its users? (plus next time, in turn, don't make it sound, in the first reply, like I'm also doing something like that when providing numbers and clarifying what the previously used ones mean)
PS. Again, it's perfectly possible that CIS numbers wouldn't be quite there with ads / without some specific efforts, generally; though they would probably just use cracked versions. Also, claiming that its taking off in mobile is merely due to opening of that market is dismissive at best - doesn't account for how large share they have (how they actually enabled large part the market is a reason to be less dismissive, not more)
Nukes provide just a very short impulse; transferring it to the whole rubble pile might turn out to be problematic.
Gravity tractors (and few other methods) can work months, years; and force from them works uniformly (or in the case of some other methods - very gently)
Though most should be small enough that it will make a difference. Oh well, I'm sure what's good for space-faring countries will have to be good for humanity (of course it will get really funny if 2+ of them disagree)
And this mess is pretty much inevitable - in the initial stages of deflection, a risk for some places will rise while it gets smaller for some other (luckily: the uncertainties involved should be big enough so that it won't be clear which are which)
Or solar sail. Or utilize Yarkovsky effect by spraying the object with paint and/or shading it & illuminating different parts of it (again, basically a sail). With so many possibilities, we should be fine - assuming early enough detection.
PS. Also, I'm curious, what exactly do you mean by "push it into the sun's gravity well"? It's constantly in it... virtually all the objects in our system are.
ESA has one nice analysis here
No, if early enough it doesn't require a very big mass at all, or some particularly asteroid-shattering impact (one other interesting, even if probably not particularly useful, method in the link above: centrifugal fragmentation; considering many asteroids seem to be barely held together rubble piles...)