A planet which gets really close to its primary is more likely to be tide locked because of the energy lost when the tidal bulge moves around. Mercury is in a 2/3 resonance for this reason.
If this planet is in a 1/1 resonance it will have one side which never gets baked at close approach, so conditions on the surface may not be as bad as they first seem.
But do we understand enough about black holes to start doing engineering on them? The impression I have is that our understanding of them is just barely beyond primitive theory. We think they will evaporate but that will really be a guess until we get some real world experience with them.
This is why I think calculations which assume the black holes will evaporate are bogus.
When it comes right down to it, though, the odds of creating a dangerous black hole is effectively zero, as evidenced by the fact that the various bodies of the solar system aren't black holes.
The sequel to 2001 is another good example of why you don't want to do this.
I am in two minds about this. 2001 had its own little world, created by Kubruck. 2010 had to be in a different world because it was a more conventional film. I don't think anything from 2010 feeds back to my impression of 2001. They are too different.
Or Ringworld. It's a straightforward enough story (crash land, have to escape, fights and sex scenes) with great SF graphic scenes. Is something majority of population could 'get' without straining a brain cell.
Ummm maybe. You need a good team to turn an SF book into a movie. Books contain a lot of background and explanation which can be really hard to incorporate into a movie script. Ringworld had a lot of background in other known space stories and readers who were confused could always go back and read them.
One of the most beautiful movies ever made... I have the feeling that the only way a sequel would get made is if Ridley Scott financed it. No studio in their right mind would touch it, as is often the case with the most worthwhile movies.
I have never had to work with Microsoft licensing but I have had to do it with Rational and IBM products. I think the licensing system is there to generate support revenue. If the actual product doesn't generate enough calls then make the licensing more complicated.
Hijack buttons get pushed by accident even now. It is hard to imagine that being done without a way to call the landing off.
And since we are talking about UAVs I should note that autoland assumes that somebody can make sure the runway is clear, either the pilot or the tower controller. If you want your UAV to land on a footpath or road then you have a different problem.
Slashdot Mirror
Welcome aboard!"
Sounds like you passed the test.
Perhaps we should bring back Trail by Ordeal
Didn't we just give that up?
But not small ones. If we once had a hundred objects the size of Ceres, and all were eaten by black holes, I doubt we would be able to detect them.
...though "Flamebait" seems strangely appropriate for this topic.
A planet which gets really close to its primary is more likely to be tide locked because of the energy lost when the tidal bulge moves around. Mercury is in a 2/3 resonance for this reason.
If this planet is in a 1/1 resonance it will have one side which never gets baked at close approach, so conditions on the surface may not be as bad as they first seem.
But do we understand enough about black holes to start doing engineering on them? The impression I have is that our understanding of them is just barely beyond primitive theory. We think they will evaporate but that will really be a guess until we get some real world experience with them.
This is why I think calculations which assume the black holes will evaporate are bogus.
When it comes right down to it, though, the odds of creating a dangerous black hole is effectively zero, as evidenced by the fact that the various bodies of the solar system aren't black holes.
So what happened to the other 200 planets?
The sequel to 2001 is another good example of why you don't want to do this.
I am in two minds about this. 2001 had its own little world, created by Kubruck. 2010 had to be in a different world because it was a more conventional film. I don't think anything from 2010 feeds back to my impression of 2001. They are too different.
IMO a movie version of A Mote in God's Eye
I fear that the bits left in would just look like Star Trek.
Have Spacesuit, Will Travel is almost coming into its own. It is set about now and could easily be slanted to a modern environmentalist theme.
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress could be epic but I wouldn't want to run the risk of a misfire. It would be hard to get right.
Friday could almost be the Blade Runner sequel. I certainly consider it cyberpunk.
Or Ringworld. It's a straightforward enough story (crash land, have to escape, fights and sex scenes) with great SF graphic scenes. Is something majority of population could 'get' without straining a brain cell.
Ummm maybe. You need a good team to turn an SF book into a movie. Books contain a lot of background and explanation which can be really hard to incorporate into a movie script. Ringworld had a lot of background in other known space stories and readers who were confused could always go back and read them.
Careful, if you ask for Heinlein you'll just get The Puppet Masters starring Tom Cruise.
Couldn't be worse than the last Puppet Masters movie.
One of the most beautiful movies ever made... I have the feeling that the only way a sequel would get made is if Ridley Scott financed it. No studio in their right mind would touch it, as is often the case with the most worthwhile movies.
-Viz
Well they let Peter Hyams make 2010.
I have never had to work with Microsoft licensing but I have had to do it with Rational and IBM products. I think the licensing system is there to generate support revenue. If the actual product doesn't generate enough calls then make the licensing more complicated.
Machine-gunning fish is fun and all, but for a really fun time you need explosives.
Yeah but don't get too greedy.
But will I have to pay for the rod?
And MS expects some preteen in Singapore to know better? Good luck with that.
Singapore yes. Cambodia, possibly not.
The fore runner of a cruise-missile was Kamikaze of WWII.
The V-1 buzz bomb was a real WWII cruise missile.
Hijack buttons get pushed by accident even now. It is hard to imagine that being done without a way to call the landing off.
And since we are talking about UAVs I should note that autoland assumes that somebody can make sure the runway is clear, either the pilot or the tower controller. If you want your UAV to land on a footpath or road then you have a different problem.
That's because it takes thousands of people to make an OS.
AST debunked that years ago. And now that minix is available under a free license there is nothing to stop the FSF calling it the GNU OS.
In Alaska or Siberia you might be at risk of your exhaust pipe being blocked by ice.
Electric motors are exceedingly light for how much power they produce. Batteries are heavy.
Also I think we will soon see integrated motor/wheel/brake assemblies on the market, so the mass overhead is shared between three functions.
32,000 American Scientists who reject not only Kyoto-style greenhouse gas limits, but the very premise of manmade global warming itself.
Really? On what basis? If you don't provide evidence you are not doing science.
Because?