Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
03-19-2003, 12:27 PM | #11 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ca
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
But seriously folks, we're all nano-wired and our minds are being archived in an ET database! Don't you see, it all makes sense, the aliens are going to raise the dead. We will all have to worship a great grey god. :notworthy Believe...Believe and you will find that your index shall be preserved for all time. Unless of course your primary index is already set to the unchangable closed minded query view, then buddy, it's strictly MS Access for your soul, yuck! :boohoo: Morgan |
|
03-19-2003, 12:52 PM | #12 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ca
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
The author pretty much debunks Star Trek and the whole nano-starship idea is pretty unique. Morgan |
|
03-19-2003, 01:01 PM | #13 |
Contributor
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas
Posts: 29,689
|
From the site:
As you can see this vehicle is not from earth. No, it's from Planet Photoshop. Interestingly enough the vessel is not capable of interstellar or interplanetary flight. It is strictly used for terrestrial purposes, why it's called a Surveyor. So that's where all those little sticks with orange ribbons are coming from? It can reach speeds up to 7000 mph And, incredibly, completely mask its sonic boom in so doing. and accelerate at over 75 Gs within 10 seconds! I'm not sure what they mean here. Can anyone decipher this and perhaps give some calculation on how fast this thing would actually be going? |
03-19-2003, 01:10 PM | #14 | |
Regular Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 422
|
Quote:
|
|
03-19-2003, 03:02 PM | #15 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ca
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
What the author says is the Star Trek view of interstellar space travel is unrealistic, given the problems of the number of stars to reach and the energy requirements. With nuclear powered Star Trek ships you're lucky to even get one percent the speed of light, as opposed to nano-star ships, which could reach a higher percentage of the speed of light, and with far less energy than it would take to push the Enterprise to 1% c. Not to mention the lower costs per ship as well. Star Trek is fast and loose with space fantasy, not science fiction. Good science fiction is more in the genera of A. C. Clark and others, or even Luvinspoon. Morgan |
|
03-19-2003, 03:26 PM | #16 | |||
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ca
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Morgan |
|||
03-19-2003, 03:26 PM | #17 | ||
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LALA Land in California
Posts: 3,764
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
03-19-2003, 03:57 PM | #18 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ca
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
Morgan |
|
03-19-2003, 07:14 PM | #19 | |||
Regular Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 422
|
Quote:
Quote:
See, just as viable and non-fictional as the "theory" of creating nano-starships to explore the universe. Most of the content of site referenced in the OP is fiction, and bad fiction at that. The typical dreck of the new age movement. Quote:
And you still haven't answered my question: how does one debunk a space opera? Particularly since it has very little basis in real science and is concerned more with telling a story or exploring the human condition. And that includes "Clark [sic]." MODERATORS: Can I request that this thread be moved to ~Elsewhere~ since it's quite obvious that it's not concerned with real science? |
|||
03-19-2003, 09:23 PM | #20 | |
Regular Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Bellingham WA
Posts: 219
|
Quote:
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|