• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • General Discussion Forums
  • General Discussion
Space and Astronomy Thread
<<
<
115 of 137
>>
>
Betty Swollax
23-07-2015
Originally Posted by Keyser_Soze1:
“
I doubt it - even in the far future.

The distances are simply far too vast - we are effectively alone in the universe no matter how many possible civilisations there could be in our own galaxy.

Even the Oort cloud is probably beyond us.”

Scientists and engineers have looked into antimatter rockets, Ion engines, solar sails and nuclear fusion and other technologies like harvesting hydrogen in space as it travels. All have their pros and cons. Nothing is impossible.
Keyser_Soze1
23-07-2015
Originally Posted by WhatJoeThinks:
“Okay, perhaps that particular planet is a very long way away, but there are closer ones. We'll definitely require near light speed propulsion, I'll grant you, which seems quite fanciful at the moment. As do space bending technologies. But until they were discovered or invented a lot of modern science and technology was unimaginable by most people.

Which do you think we'll solve first (if any); the hard problem of consciousness or mega propulsion technology?”

I think we are actually on our way to solving the problem of consciousness.

As for mega-propulsion technology it would require vast amounts of money and as the space race is long over I cannot see any of the problems being solved in the near future (even with unlimited funds).

Certainly nothing approaching light speed - our probes (like New Horizons) have barely increased in velocity in decades.
njp
23-07-2015
Originally Posted by Keyser_Soze1:
“But the speed of light is still the barrier - even if we approach it with probes in the far future the visible universe is just so impossibly massive”

If we could approach sufficiently close to the speed of light, the massive size of the Universe would be no impediment to the travellers themselves, thanks to relativistic time dilation.

Of course, attempting to communicate their findings with those left behind would be the ultimate exercise in futility...
Betty Swollax
23-07-2015
We need to find a way to bend the fabric of space.
WhatJoeThinks
24-07-2015
Originally Posted by Keyser_Soze1:
“I think we are actually on our way to solving the problem of consciousness.

As for mega-propulsion technology it would require vast amounts of money and as the space race is long over I cannot see any of the problems being solved in the near future (even with unlimited funds).

Certainly nothing approaching light speed - our probes (like New Horizons) have barely increased in velocity in decades.”

Interesting. I would say the opposite. Something like the hard problem of consciousness seems unsolvable to me, as there are no known steps to take in the right direction and no real impetus to try. Propulsion on the other hand is something that mankind makes good use of, and there are incremental improvements to be had, as well as a host of proposed alternatives. New Horizons is our fastest spacecraft to date and I'm sure we'll surpass that one day soon. The fact that we are continuing to improve things, no matter how slowly, bodes well for the future.
njp
24-07-2015
Originally Posted by WhatJoeThinks:
“Interesting. I would say the opposite. Something like the hard problem of consciousness seems unsolvable to me, as there are no known steps to take in the right direction and no real impetus to try. Propulsion on the other hand is something that mankind makes good use of, and there are incremental improvements to be had, as well as a host of proposed alternatives. New Horizons is our fastest spacecraft to date and I'm sure we'll surpass that one day soon. The fact that we are continuing to improve things, no matter how slowly, bodes well for the future.”

I disagree. The problem of consciousness is clearly soluble, because it has already been solved by evolution. The problem of propulsion, on the other hand, is subject to well-known constraints imposed by physics.

Circumventing those relies on highly speculative new physics, and so might never be possible.
WhatJoeThinks
24-07-2015
Originally Posted by njp:
“I disagree. The problem of consciousness is clearly soluble, because it has already been solved by evolution. The problem of propulsion, on the other hand, is subject to well-known constraints imposed by physics.

Circumventing those relies on highly speculative new physics, and so might never be possible.”

I'm talking about the hard problem of consciousness. Evolution has created consciousness, it hasn't explained it. And just like propulsion it is subject to the constraints imposed by the laws of physics.

There's no necessity to circumvent those laws to reach other solar systems, nor could even the most speculative new physics circumvent those laws. They are immutable, as far as I understand.
Keyser_Soze1
24-07-2015
Originally Posted by njp:
“If we could approach sufficiently close to the speed of light, the massive size of the Universe would be no impediment to the travellers themselves, thanks to relativistic time dilation.

Of course, attempting to communicate their findings with those left behind would be the ultimate exercise in futility...”

Well of course.

But as you say the communication of the wonders seen by anybody on a near-light speed ship to those on earth would be impossible.
njp
24-07-2015
Originally Posted by WhatJoeThinks:
“ I'm talking about the hard problem of consciousness.”

You probably won't be surprised to hear that I reject the existence of the "hard" problem. I would align myself with Dennett and others in that regard.
zx50
24-07-2015
Originally Posted by Keyser_Soze1:
“But the speed of light is still the barrier - even if we approach it with probes in the far future the visible universe is just so impossibly massive”

Unless we discover a 'trick' to helping us to achieve lightspeed or beyond, I suspect objects outside our solar system will be out of our reach. Even at lightspeed, we still might as well be in a clapped out banger car.
njp
24-07-2015
Originally Posted by zx50:
“Even at lightspeed, we still might as well be in a clapped out banger car.”

Not true. At lightspeed, you could traverse the entire observable Universe in an instant. The only places destined to remain forever beyond your reach would be beyond the edges of the observable Universe, which are receding faster than the speed of light, thanks to the metric expansion of space.

You would of course have to abandon all hope of ever returning, since the Sun would have lived out its entire life and died, wiping out the Earth in the process, while you were away.
atg
24-07-2015
Originally Posted by njp:
“If we could approach sufficiently close to the speed of light, the massive size of the Universe would be no impediment to the travellers themselves, thanks to relativistic time dilation.

.”

As Brian Cox pointed out on Infinite Monkey Cage the other day, when somebody in Futurama said that they increased the speed of light in order to be able to travel across the galaxy they were wrong. It would be much better to reduce it, to 30mph, so you could benefit from dilation effects in a Prius, whatever that is.
atg
24-07-2015
Originally Posted by WhatJoeThinks:
“Interesting. I would say the opposite. Something like the hard problem of consciousness seems unsolvable to me, as there are no known steps to take in the right direction and no real impetus to try. .”

I think it's more of a mystery than a problem that needs solving. We can still carry on regardless without knowing the true nature of consciousness. Which I suppose is why there's no impetus to try. But then we probably have no idea what the nature of an answer might be anyway. We can safely leave it to the philosophers for the moment.
Patti-Ann
24-07-2015
For anyone in the Yorkshire area, there's an exhibition on at Magna Science and Adventure:

http://www.visitmagna.co.uk/events/
FIN-MAN
24-07-2015
This is probably one of the most incredible rocket launch videos I have ever seen. It's a slow motion video of the Apollo 11 Saturn V launch from the boosters perspective. There is just something beautiful about watching something so powerful, as the Saturn V, belching out all that fire.
https://vimeo.com/4366695
Eddie Badger
24-07-2015
Originally Posted by FIN-MAN:
“This is probably one of the most incredible rocket launch videos I have ever seen. It's a slow motion video of the Apollo 11 Saturn V launch from the boosters perspective. There is just something beautiful about watching something so powerful, as the Saturn V, belching out all that fire.
https://vimeo.com/4366695”

I think the word "awesome" was invented for the Saturn V. Imagine what it must have been like sitting on top of that!
As John Glenn said:
Quote:
“I guess the question I'm asked the most often is: "When you were sitting in that capsule listening to the count-down, how did you feel?" Well, the answer to that one is easy. I felt exactly how you would feel if you were getting ready to launch and knew you were sitting on top of two million parts -- all built by the lowest bidder on a government contract.”

FIN-MAN
25-07-2015
Originally Posted by Eddie Badger:
“I think the word "awesome" was invented for the Saturn V. Imagine what it must have been like sitting on top of that!
As John Glenn said:”

The Saturn V is truly massive. If you ever get a chance to visit the John f. Kennedy Space Center or the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center I would highly recommend it. The diminutive size of the capsule compared to the rocket is staggering. Those original astronauts had balls of steel strapping themselves in to that thing, especially considering the unknown factor.

File archive of the Apollo missions.
http://www.apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html
TelevisionUser
25-07-2015
Originally Posted by CLL Dodge:
“'Earth 2.0' found:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-33641648

Never knew it had been lost.”

Unfortunately, there's way too much premature hype and speculation about Earth analogue planets and it's all based on very little, if any, evidence:

Jon Jenkins told the press conference: "The sunshine from Kepler's star is very similar to sunshine from our own star, and plants could be able to photosynthesise just the same.". "It would feel a lot like home."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/sc...-10411792.html

In reality, it might be like Venus or Planet Ultra-Sahara with polar temperatures of 60*C+ temperatures. More evidence needs to be gathered, e.g. about this planet's atmosphere*, before any informed comments are made.

*It's been done before: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture09602.html
WhatJoeThinks
07-08-2015
The Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) spacecraft has taken a series of photographs of the Moon transiting the Earth (video). I'm surprised how dark the Moon looks compared to the Earth.
atg
11-08-2015
Originally Posted by WhatJoeThinks:
“The Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) spacecraft has taken a series of photographs of the Moon transiting the Earth (video). I'm surprised how dark the Moon looks compared to the Earth.”

I think most people don't realise the moon is darker than coal. It reflects only about 12% of light whereas Earth reflects about 40%. I have read some astronauts saying Earth seems to glow like a neon lamp in comparison.
WhatJoeThinks
11-08-2015
Originally Posted by atg:
“I think most people don't realise the moon is darker than coal. It reflects only about 12% of light whereas Earth reflects about 40%. I have read some astronauts saying Earth seems to glow like a neon lamp in comparison.”

Yes, I've told friends and family during a full moon that the Moon's albedo is similar to charcoal. It always looks like a bright, sunny 'day' on a pale grey Moon to my eyes, against the dark sky at least, but seeing it against the Earth really shows how dark it is.
Heston Veston
12-08-2015
Originally Posted by WhatJoeThinks:
“The Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) spacecraft has taken a series of photographs of the Moon transiting the Earth (video). I'm surprised how dark the Moon looks compared to the Earth.”

As Mr Driscoll pointed out in 1973, there is no dark side of the moon really. Matter of fact, it's all dark.
Assa2
18-08-2015
'Speed' or velocity isn't really an issue, even today. We could easily build a probe and send it off in some direction at an incredibly high velocity if we wanted, by which I mean non-relativistic velocity. Gravity assist such as the orbits used by New Horizons is a gift that keeps on giving if you're prepared to go round and round again. The thing is as far as solar system science missions are concerned, you don't want to go too fast. New Horizons was already far too fast to go into orbit around Pluto. Much quicker and the fly-past wouldn't have garnered much useful data. There's just no demand for going really fast today because you've always got to slow down when you arrive where-ever you're going.

The feasibility of journeying to another star system has nothing to do with the distance. It's about how long it would take. Hundreds of years, thousands, maybe a lot longer. Do we have the technology to sustain life and the technology the life relies on? Can we put people to sleep for really long periods and then safely awaken them? Or do we build vast colony ships where generation after generation of people live and die knowing that it will be their distant descendants who colonise the new system. Nothing about such an undertaking is utterly implausible. Economic, social and political pressures will make it inevitable one day. People do pretty mad things to survive or in the hope of better life, you only have to look at the situation in the Med at the moment to see that.

When the first Homo Sapiens left Africa they weren't thinking about how unimaginably far the other side of the planet was or how they'd never get to see the Pacific Ocean (obviously because they had no idea what lay over the horizon, but you get my point). All they were thinking was "I hope we can find somewhere in that direction where the gazelle are a bit more abundant, the lions and bit less so and the neighbours aren't so noisy and won't keep stealing our food". Fast forward a hundred thousand years and the species has colonised the entire planet, literally one step at a time.

If (and it's the biggest if there is) we learn to live away from this place, either in space or on other planetary bodies then hopefully we'll make ourselves immune to the sort of catastrophes that could wipe us out while we are whole dependent on this single home. Then it's just a matter of time, and that's one thing there's plenty of, cosmologically speaking.
Fizzbin
22-08-2015
Not sure if it's been posted before, but here's a nice video taken from the ISS - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOAEIMx39-w

Best viewed in 4K, if your equipment can manage that.
Eddie Badger
22-08-2015
Originally Posted by Heston Veston:
“As Mr Driscoll pointed out in 1973, there is no dark side of the moon really. Matter of fact, it's all dark.”

Yes there is, I've got the CD
<<
<
115 of 137
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map