FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Next mass extinction event
Next mass extinction event
Jump to: Newest in thread
Could covid have been the one do you think some government will come up with a solution to overpopulation of the earth or will mother nature strike back for the destruction we are causing thoughts on this |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Throughout the history of the Earth there has always been cycles. The only thing to ever survive has been the earth itself. Many of the worlds thought leaders believe we are only part of this cycle and eventually it will also end and humans will become extinct.
We are just speeding up that process in our destruction |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
If the elements dont kill is all off like in the films The Day After Tomorrow or 2012, the only thing thatll cause our extinction is our pwn stupidity, and im placing bets on the latter |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *yron69Man
over a year ago
Fareham |
Stop blaming third world people for all our ills.
It’s rich westerners that are causing climate change. The millions of Africa might erode forests but consumption is pushing up the carbon dioxide. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Humans have messed up long enough now to make extinction happen. Personally, I think the world would be a better place if we all fucked off and let the animals have it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Stop blaming third world people for all our ills.
It’s rich westerners that are causing climate change. The millions of Africa might erode forests but consumption is pushing up the carbon dioxide."
Eh, the biggest amount of deforestation is in Brazil, not Africa
Yes, consumption increases carbon levels. And yes, deforestation does too (well, reduces the amount of offsetting ... same net effect) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rhugesMan
over a year ago
Cardiff |
"Stop blaming third world people for all our ills.
It’s rich westerners that are causing climate change. The millions of Africa might erode forests but consumption is pushing up the carbon dioxide."
With reference to climate change the big three are china USA Russia and India. The UK contributes 1.1% to the green house effect while china contributes around 27 percent |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Is what it is. I'm personally going to concentrate on the factor in life I can effect and live my best life."
Well said! I'm told by an alcoholics wife that alcholics anonymous start their meetings with:
GOD grant me the serenity to accept the things that I cannot change, change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.
I'm smart enough to know that I can't change the world, so we might enjoy all that it has to offer right now. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Governments will never discourage population growth as every person on this planet is a potential customer and/or taxpayer.
As long as 'growth' rather than breaking even remains the economic mantra, we are going to have to rely on nature, mainly through disease, and also warfare to do the job of reducing the population. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Pointless worrying about it, whatever its going to be. Make changes to your lifestyle if it makes you feel better and you can feel you can make an active difference. We are born to live, not born to be worried about how we die!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovebjsMan
over a year ago
Bristol |
"Stop blaming third world people for all our ills.
It’s rich westerners that are causing climate change. The millions of Africa might erode forests but consumption is pushing up the carbon dioxide.
Eh, the biggest amount of deforestation is in Brazil, not Africa
Yes, consumption increases carbon levels. And yes, deforestation does too (well, reduces the amount of offsetting ... same net effect) "
But ask yourself why they are burning and chopping down the forests in Brazil ?
It’s all about business  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Is what it is. I'm personally going to concentrate on the factor in life I can effect and live my best life."
Snap.
I find it absolutely pointless hypothesising about extinction in this ands or millions of years time. The reality will be evolution and adaptation in terms of how and where we live. The one certainty is that we will all be dead long before we get remotely near that point.
I also find it boring and unhelpful that climate activists queue up to piss all over every initiative and effort, saying it is insufficient, won’t work, won’t happen etc. Tedious negativity.
Stunning day today, freezing but sunny. Enjoy! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Stop blaming third world people for all our ills.
It’s rich westerners that are causing climate change. The millions of Africa might erode forests but consumption is pushing up the carbon dioxide.
Eh, the biggest amount of deforestation is in Brazil, not Africa
Yes, consumption increases carbon levels. And yes, deforestation does too (well, reduces the amount of offsetting ... same net effect)
But ask yourself why they are burning and chopping down the forests in Brazil ?
It’s all about business "
Hi. I was replying to a note that suggested that deforestation is mainly happening in Africa. Brazil is not in Africa |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Is what it is. I'm personally going to concentrate on the factor in life I can effect and live my best life.
Snap.
...
"
Well, I have done my bit for the world by consciously deciding that I didn't want to bring children into it (admittedly, at the time it had more to to do with the higher probability of nuclear annihilation) and then later making the decision permanent with a vasectomy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Is what it is. I'm personally going to concentrate on the factor in life I can effect and live my best life.
Snap.
...
Well, I have done my bit for the world by consciously deciding that I didn't want to bring children into it (admittedly, at the time it had more to to do with the higher probability of nuclear annihilation) and then later making the decision permanent with a vasectomy. "
Nuclear annihilation.
Ozone layer.
AIDS
... 3 of the world-ending things I have somehow managed to survive.
The press always love bigging up the latest end of the world scare story. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Humans have taken control away from mother nature. The earth is possibly beyond the point of repair.
On a sour note in a couple of billion years the sun will expand to where Venus now is and the planet will be fried.
We are fucked. Mother Nature can't help.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Probably comes war between super powers that will end it all
For 1 of 3 reasons
Something political. Russia looking to take a Ukraine for example. It’s not a direct start to a war, but s political based one
One of the super powers developing new tech that gives them the advantage. If China developed so kind of weapon that put them far enough ahead other super powers might feel forced to strike first before that tech is fully developed
Mass immigration due to climate change. A fight for land, food and fresh water ensues |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most "
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Why do so many insist on anthropomorphising "mother" nature?
She doesn't exist. There is no entity with a will to heal or destroy or protect or revenge or any of that nonsense. If there were a real being the poor woman is gonna be in for a shock when the expanding sun melts her planet.
Life just is, it will continue to be whatever we do or don't do. Will there be another virus more deadly than Covid? Who knows, there could be. There could also be another massive meteorite strike or a super volcano eruption. If any of these things happen they won't be because mother nature decided they should.
What we do know is our actions are affecting the climate and that in turn is going to lead to significant human (and animal) suffering unless our behaviour changes. Whether that change will come about through human endeavour or some mix of external events remains to be seen. What is definite is that it will change sooner or later - nothing lasts for ever.
Mr |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution "
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last."
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen"
but will the masses be included or just the chosen ones |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen"
I doubt we will solve the problem of artificial gravity in that time frame but definitely in the long term. If we don't die from a plague or a famine we could survive after the earth is gone. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygenbut will the masses be included or just the chosen ones "
Who knows, but even the chosen ones remain as the human race, whether we like it or not |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why do so many insist on anthropomorphising "mother" nature?
She doesn't exist. There is no entity with a will to heal or destroy or protect or revenge or any of that nonsense. If there were a real being the poor woman is gonna be in for a shock when the expanding sun melts her planet.
Life just is, it will continue to be whatever we do or don't do. Will there be another virus more deadly than Covid? Who knows, there could be. There could also be another massive meteorite strike or a super volcano eruption. If any of these things happen they won't be because mother nature decided they should.
What we do know is our actions are affecting the climate and that in turn is going to lead to significant human (and animal) suffering unless our behaviour changes. Whether that change will come about through human endeavour or some mix of external events remains to be seen. What is definite is that it will change sooner or later - nothing lasts for ever.
Mr"
For a lot of us using the term Mother Nature" is connected to our spiritual beliefs. A bit like that tribe that refers to itself as "older brother" it gives a sense of connection and family. Most of us realise that nature isn't a sentient being who can control her actions or is conscious on any level but we do understand that nature is reactive therefore our actions affect it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen
I doubt we will solve the problem of artificial gravity in that time frame but definitely in the long term. If we don't die from a plague or a famine we could survive after the earth is gone."
They already know how to do that. It’s called centrifugal force |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen
I doubt we will solve the problem of artificial gravity in that time frame but definitely in the long term. If we don't die from a plague or a famine we could survive after the earth is gone.
They already know how to do that. It’s called centrifugal force "
How do you create enough trust to accelerate at a constant 1g?
An entire Space station travelling at that speed constantly rotating?
That problem won't be solved anytime soon.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It makes me smile that as a species we're arrogant enough to imagine that we're the most important living thing on the planet and that earth won't survive without us.
It will. Cockroaches and aloe vera plants are waiting quietly in the wings. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It makes me smile that as a species we're arrogant enough to imagine that we're the most important living thing on the planet and that earth won't survive without us.
It will. Cockroaches and aloe vera plants are waiting quietly in the wings. "
This line keeps coming up. But I can’t think of a single species of animal that thinks differently. All want to survive, eat, kill etc, killing one another, their own offspring in some cases, other dominant males, other species.
We are the only species where some of us think we are NOT the most important! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It makes me smile that as a species we're arrogant enough to imagine that we're the most important living thing on the planet and that earth won't survive without us.
It will. Cockroaches and aloe vera plants are waiting quietly in the wings. "
We are not the most important species but unfortunately we are the most dominant and that's the problem.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It makes me smile that as a species we're arrogant enough to imagine that we're the most important living thing on the planet and that earth won't survive without us.
It will. Cockroaches and aloe vera plants are waiting quietly in the wings.
This line keeps coming up. But I can’t think of a single species of animal that thinks differently. All want to survive, eat, kill etc, killing one another, their own offspring in some cases, other dominant males, other species.
We are the only species where some of us think we are NOT the most important! "
Good point, well made. The motive for other species is survival of their particular species humans motives appears to me anyway, to be dominance and subjugation of other species |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *arry247Couple
over a year ago
Wakefield |
Climate change has been around since the dawn of time and nature has adapted with it, don't forget the planet is still coming out of the last ice age not much more than a blink of the eye in geologic terms.
What is far more dangerous to the planet is plastic, that is killing off all types of creatures big and small and preventing many types form breeding. This will cause more problems than climate change.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen
I doubt we will solve the problem of artificial gravity in that time frame but definitely in the long term. If we don't die from a plague or a famine we could survive after the earth is gone.
They already know how to do that. It’s called centrifugal force
How do you create enough trust to accelerate at a constant 1g?
An entire Space station travelling at that speed constantly rotating?
That problem won't be solved anytime soon.
"
Exactly that, the space station doesn’t need to be travelling, just rotating at enough speed to generate 1g of centrifugal force
In theory and practical it’s not that hard. It’s just expensive and not needed now. But in 100-200 years it could absolutely be viable and needed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It makes me smile that as a species we're arrogant enough to imagine that we're the most important living thing on the planet and that earth won't survive without us.
It will. Cockroaches and aloe vera plants are waiting quietly in the wings. "
the earth will thrive without human interference |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution "
na I don't agree. The human race has been on earth approximately 200000 years and Wath has been around for almost 7 billion (maybe wrong) but we are literally a blink in the grand scheme of things. Our time is almost up |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Climate change has been around since the dawn of time and nature has adapted with it, don't forget the planet is still coming out of the last ice age not much more than a blink of the eye in geologic terms.
What is far more dangerous to the planet is plastic, that is killing off all types of creatures big and small and preventing many types form breeding. This will cause more problems than climate change.
"
This 
Microplastics that we are drinking in tap water that have carcinogenic properties is what we should be looking at, filtering out from 4.9 per litre to 0.00011 per litre is not good enough |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution na I don't agree. The human race has been on earth approximately 200000 years and Wath has been around for almost 7 billion (maybe wrong) but we are literally a blink in the grand scheme of things. Our time is almost up "
Not much of a disagreement but fair enough
I think in the next 100-200 years technology will evolve to the point we won’t need a planet anymore. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen
I doubt we will solve the problem of artificial gravity in that time frame but definitely in the long term. If we don't die from a plague or a famine we could survive after the earth is gone.
They already know how to do that. It’s called centrifugal force
How do you create enough trust to accelerate at a constant 1g?
An entire Space station travelling at that speed constantly rotating?
That problem won't be solved anytime soon.
Exactly that, the space station doesn’t need to be travelling, just rotating at enough speed to generate 1g of centrifugal force
In theory and practical it’s not that hard. It’s just expensive and not needed now. But in 100-200 years it could absolutely be viable and needed."
But it needs constant propulsion to create 1g. That's not feasible in the next couple of hundred years.
It costs $200'000 to put a kilo of anything into space, cost aside , the type of energy and propulsion you are talking about dosnt exist. We don't have the capability to rotate the ISS for a day with the technology we have. Possibly thousands of years before we can do something of the magnitude you are talking about. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Why do so many insist on anthropomorphising "mother" nature?
She doesn't exist. There is no entity with a will to heal or destroy or protect or revenge or any of that nonsense. If there were a real being the poor woman is gonna be in for a shock when the expanding sun melts her planet.
Life just is, it will continue to be whatever we do or don't do. Will there be another virus more deadly than Covid? Who knows, there could be. There could also be another massive meteorite strike or a super volcano eruption. If any of these things happen they won't be because mother nature decided they should.
What we do know is our actions are affecting the climate and that in turn is going to lead to significant human (and animal) suffering unless our behaviour changes. Whether that change will come about through human endeavour or some mix of external events remains to be seen. What is definite is that it will change sooner or later - nothing lasts for ever.
Mr
For a lot of us using the term Mother Nature" is connected to our spiritual beliefs. A bit like that tribe that refers to itself as "older brother" it gives a sense of connection and family. Most of us realise that nature isn't a sentient being who can control her actions or is conscious on any level but we do understand that nature is reactive therefore our actions affect it."
Like all such spiritual beliefs though it runs the risk of misrepresenting issues and therefore shaping or even shutting down lines of enquiry. The OP talks of mother nature striking back and implies this was a possible cause of Covid. Reasoning like this influences people's beliefs, influences their reaction to (for example) covid vaccinations. There are plenty of people who will tell you they don't need a vaccine as they live in tune with mother nature so their immune system is strong enough. Words have power and if we use the wrong ones to express our problems we make the task of solving them much harder.
Mr |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen
I doubt we will solve the problem of artificial gravity in that time frame but definitely in the long term. If we don't die from a plague or a famine we could survive after the earth is gone.
They already know how to do that. It’s called centrifugal force
How do you create enough trust to accelerate at a constant 1g?
An entire Space station travelling at that speed constantly rotating?
That problem won't be solved anytime soon.
Exactly that, the space station doesn’t need to be travelling, just rotating at enough speed to generate 1g of centrifugal force
In theory and practical it’s not that hard. It’s just expensive and not needed now. But in 100-200 years it could absolutely be viable and needed.
But it needs constant propulsion to create 1g. That's not feasible in the next couple of hundred years.
It costs $200'000 to put a kilo of anything into space, cost aside , the type of energy and propulsion you are talking about dosnt exist. We don't have the capability to rotate the ISS for a day with the technology we have. Possibly thousands of years before we can do something of the magnitude you are talking about."
Go read the wiki page on artificial gravity. You don’t need forward propulsion, only rotation. These ideas already exist, they’ve been tested on a small scale that we know how to do them on a bigger scale.
And of course it doesn’t exist, 30 years ago the internet didn’t exist. It costs that much to put a kilo into space today, what will it cost in 20, 30 or even 100 years? I think your vastly underestimating the exponential growth of technology. Children use iPads with more computing power that the Apollo mission to watch Ryan’s toys videos. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why do so many insist on anthropomorphising "mother" nature?
She doesn't exist. There is no entity with a will to heal or destroy or protect or revenge or any of that nonsense. If there were a real being the poor woman is gonna be in for a shock when the expanding sun melts her planet.
Life just is, it will continue to be whatever we do or don't do. Will there be another virus more deadly than Covid? Who knows, there could be. There could also be another massive meteorite strike or a super volcano eruption. If any of these things happen they won't be because mother nature decided they should.
What we do know is our actions are affecting the climate and that in turn is going to lead to significant human (and animal) suffering unless our behaviour changes. Whether that change will come about through human endeavour or some mix of external events remains to be seen. What is definite is that it will change sooner or later - nothing lasts for ever.
Mr
For a lot of us using the term Mother Nature" is connected to our spiritual beliefs. A bit like that tribe that refers to itself as "older brother" it gives a sense of connection and family. Most of us realise that nature isn't a sentient being who can control her actions or is conscious on any level but we do understand that nature is reactive therefore our actions affect it.
Like all such spiritual beliefs though it runs the risk of misrepresenting issues and therefore shaping or even shutting down lines of enquiry. The OP talks of mother nature striking back and implies this was a possible cause of Covid. Reasoning like this influences people's beliefs, influences their reaction to (for example) covid vaccinations. There are plenty of people who will tell you they don't need a vaccine as they live in tune with mother nature so their immune system is strong enough. Words have power and if we use the wrong ones to express our problems we make the task of solving them much harder.
Mr"
mother nature is an everyday term i think most people know that I've had my vacs plus booster |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen
I doubt we will solve the problem of artificial gravity in that time frame but definitely in the long term. If we don't die from a plague or a famine we could survive after the earth is gone.
They already know how to do that. It’s called centrifugal force
How do you create enough trust to accelerate at a constant 1g?
An entire Space station travelling at that speed constantly rotating?
That problem won't be solved anytime soon.
Exactly that, the space station doesn’t need to be travelling, just rotating at enough speed to generate 1g of centrifugal force
In theory and practical it’s not that hard. It’s just expensive and not needed now. But in 100-200 years it could absolutely be viable and needed.
But it needs constant propulsion to create 1g. That's not feasible in the next couple of hundred years.
It costs $200'000 to put a kilo of anything into space, cost aside , the type of energy and propulsion you are talking about dosnt exist. We don't have the capability to rotate the ISS for a day with the technology we have. Possibly thousands of years before we can do something of the magnitude you are talking about.
Go read the wiki page on artificial gravity. You don’t need forward propulsion, only rotation. These ideas already exist, they’ve been tested on a small scale that we know how to do them on a bigger scale.
And of course it doesn’t exist, 30 years ago the internet didn’t exist. It costs that much to put a kilo into space today, what will it cost in 20, 30 or even 100 years? I think your vastly underestimating the exponential growth of technology. Children use iPads with more computing power that the Apollo mission to watch Ryan’s toys videos. "
Wikipedia, hahaha.
Artificial gravity needs acceleration.
Google the Equivalence Principle.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen
I doubt we will solve the problem of artificial gravity in that time frame but definitely in the long term. If we don't die from a plague or a famine we could survive after the earth is gone.
They already know how to do that. It’s called centrifugal force
How do you create enough trust to accelerate at a constant 1g?
An entire Space station travelling at that speed constantly rotating?
That problem won't be solved anytime soon.
Exactly that, the space station doesn’t need to be travelling, just rotating at enough speed to generate 1g of centrifugal force
In theory and practical it’s not that hard. It’s just expensive and not needed now. But in 100-200 years it could absolutely be viable and needed.
But it needs constant propulsion to create 1g. That's not feasible in the next couple of hundred years.
It costs $200'000 to put a kilo of anything into space, cost aside , the type of energy and propulsion you are talking about dosnt exist. We don't have the capability to rotate the ISS for a day with the technology we have. Possibly thousands of years before we can do something of the magnitude you are talking about.
Go read the wiki page on artificial gravity. You don’t need forward propulsion, only rotation. These ideas already exist, they’ve been tested on a small scale that we know how to do them on a bigger scale.
And of course it doesn’t exist, 30 years ago the internet didn’t exist. It costs that much to put a kilo into space today, what will it cost in 20, 30 or even 100 years? I think your vastly underestimating the exponential growth of technology. Children use iPads with more computing power that the Apollo mission to watch Ryan’s toys videos.
Wikipedia, hahaha.
Artificial gravity needs acceleration.
Google the Equivalence Principle.
"
Wiki isn’t a good source on science now? What is? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It makes me smile that as a species we're arrogant enough to imagine that we're the most important living thing on the planet and that earth won't survive without us.
It will. Cockroaches and aloe vera plants are waiting quietly in the wings.
This line keeps coming up. But I can’t think of a single species of animal that thinks differently. All want to survive, eat, kill etc, killing one another, their own offspring in some cases, other dominant males, other species.
We are the only species where some of us think we are NOT the most important!
Good point, well made. The motive for other species is survival of their particular species humans motives appears to me anyway, to be dominance and subjugation of other species "
Other species don’t have a conscience. Some humans do. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It makes me smile that as a species we're arrogant enough to imagine that we're the most important living thing on the planet and that earth won't survive without us.
It will. Cockroaches and aloe vera plants are waiting quietly in the wings.
This line keeps coming up. But I can’t think of a single species of animal that thinks differently. All want to survive, eat, kill etc, killing one another, their own offspring in some cases, other dominant males, other species.
We are the only species where some of us think we are NOT the most important!
Good point, well made. The motive for other species is survival of their particular species humans motives appears to me anyway, to be dominance and subjugation of other species
Other species don’t have a conscience. Some humans do. "
Thank goodness I'm not one of them ... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen
I doubt we will solve the problem of artificial gravity in that time frame but definitely in the long term. If we don't die from a plague or a famine we could survive after the earth is gone.
They already know how to do that. It’s called centrifugal force
How do you create enough trust to accelerate at a constant 1g?
An entire Space station travelling at that speed constantly rotating?
That problem won't be solved anytime soon.
Exactly that, the space station doesn’t need to be travelling, just rotating at enough speed to generate 1g of centrifugal force
In theory and practical it’s not that hard. It’s just expensive and not needed now. But in 100-200 years it could absolutely be viable and needed.
But it needs constant propulsion to create 1g. That's not feasible in the next couple of hundred years.
It costs $200'000 to put a kilo of anything into space, cost aside , the type of energy and propulsion you are talking about dosnt exist. We don't have the capability to rotate the ISS for a day with the technology we have. Possibly thousands of years before we can do something of the magnitude you are talking about.
Go read the wiki page on artificial gravity. You don’t need forward propulsion, only rotation. These ideas already exist, they’ve been tested on a small scale that we know how to do them on a bigger scale.
And of course it doesn’t exist, 30 years ago the internet didn’t exist. It costs that much to put a kilo into space today, what will it cost in 20, 30 or even 100 years? I think your vastly underestimating the exponential growth of technology. Children use iPads with more computing power that the Apollo mission to watch Ryan’s toys videos.
Wikipedia, hahaha.
Artificial gravity needs acceleration.
Google the Equivalence Principle.
"
Googled it, it’s mentioned in the Wikipedia and actually supports my point that you don’t need acceleration, just rotational
“ Artificial gravity is the creation of an inertial force that mimics the effects of a gravitational force, usually by rotation. Artificial gravity, or rotational gravity, is thus the appearance of a centrifugal force in a rotating frame of reference (the transmission of centripetal acceleration via normal force in the non-rotating frame of reference), as opposed to the force experienced in linear acceleration, which by the equivalence principle is indistinguishable from gravity.” |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Humans have messed up long enough now to make extinction happen. Personally, I think the world would be a better place if we all fucked off and let the animals have it."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen
I doubt we will solve the problem of artificial gravity in that time frame but definitely in the long term. If we don't die from a plague or a famine we could survive after the earth is gone.
They already know how to do that. It’s called centrifugal force
How do you create enough trust to accelerate at a constant 1g?
An entire Space station travelling at that speed constantly rotating?
That problem won't be solved anytime soon.
Exactly that, the space station doesn’t need to be travelling, just rotating at enough speed to generate 1g of centrifugal force
In theory and practical it’s not that hard. It’s just expensive and not needed now. But in 100-200 years it could absolutely be viable and needed.
But it needs constant propulsion to create 1g. That's not feasible in the next couple of hundred years.
It costs $200'000 to put a kilo of anything into space, cost aside , the type of energy and propulsion you are talking about dosnt exist. We don't have the capability to rotate the ISS for a day with the technology we have. Possibly thousands of years before we can do something of the magnitude you are talking about.
Go read the wiki page on artificial gravity. You don’t need forward propulsion, only rotation. These ideas already exist, they’ve been tested on a small scale that we know how to do them on a bigger scale.
And of course it doesn’t exist, 30 years ago the internet didn’t exist. It costs that much to put a kilo into space today, what will it cost in 20, 30 or even 100 years? I think your vastly underestimating the exponential growth of technology. Children use iPads with more computing power that the Apollo mission to watch Ryan’s toys videos.
Wikipedia, hahaha.
Artificial gravity needs acceleration.
Google the Equivalence Principle.
Googled it, it’s mentioned in the Wikipedia and actually supports my point that you don’t need acceleration, just rotational
“ Artificial gravity is the creation of an inertial force that mimics the effects of a gravitational force, usually by rotation. Artificial gravity, or rotational gravity, is thus the appearance of a centrifugal force in a rotating frame of reference (the transmission of centripetal acceleration via normal force in the non-rotating frame of reference), as opposed to the force experienced in linear acceleration, which by the equivalence principle is indistinguishable from gravity.”"
I think you may have watched Interstellar to many times. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen
I doubt we will solve the problem of artificial gravity in that time frame but definitely in the long term. If we don't die from a plague or a famine we could survive after the earth is gone.
They already know how to do that. It’s called centrifugal force
How do you create enough trust to accelerate at a constant 1g?
An entire Space station travelling at that speed constantly rotating?
That problem won't be solved anytime soon.
Exactly that, the space station doesn’t need to be travelling, just rotating at enough speed to generate 1g of centrifugal force
In theory and practical it’s not that hard. It’s just expensive and not needed now. But in 100-200 years it could absolutely be viable and needed.
But it needs constant propulsion to create 1g. That's not feasible in the next couple of hundred years.
It costs $200'000 to put a kilo of anything into space, cost aside , the type of energy and propulsion you are talking about dosnt exist. We don't have the capability to rotate the ISS for a day with the technology we have. Possibly thousands of years before we can do something of the magnitude you are talking about.
Go read the wiki page on artificial gravity. You don’t need forward propulsion, only rotation. These ideas already exist, they’ve been tested on a small scale that we know how to do them on a bigger scale.
And of course it doesn’t exist, 30 years ago the internet didn’t exist. It costs that much to put a kilo into space today, what will it cost in 20, 30 or even 100 years? I think your vastly underestimating the exponential growth of technology. Children use iPads with more computing power that the Apollo mission to watch Ryan’s toys videos.
Wikipedia, hahaha.
Artificial gravity needs acceleration.
Google the Equivalence Principle.
Googled it, it’s mentioned in the Wikipedia and actually supports my point that you don’t need acceleration, just rotational
“ Artificial gravity is the creation of an inertial force that mimics the effects of a gravitational force, usually by rotation. Artificial gravity, or rotational gravity, is thus the appearance of a centrifugal force in a rotating frame of reference (the transmission of centripetal acceleration via normal force in the non-rotating frame of reference), as opposed to the force experienced in linear acceleration, which by the equivalence principle is indistinguishable from gravity.”
I think you may have watched Interstellar to many times."
It’s right there in black and white, if you’ve nothing to add other than to laugh at wiki and mention a film I guess the convo is over |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen
I doubt we will solve the problem of artificial gravity in that time frame but definitely in the long term. If we don't die from a plague or a famine we could survive after the earth is gone.
They already know how to do that. It’s called centrifugal force
How do you create enough trust to accelerate at a constant 1g?
An entire Space station travelling at that speed constantly rotating?
That problem won't be solved anytime soon.
Exactly that, the space station doesn’t need to be travelling, just rotating at enough speed to generate 1g of centrifugal force
In theory and practical it’s not that hard. It’s just expensive and not needed now. But in 100-200 years it could absolutely be viable and needed.
But it needs constant propulsion to create 1g. That's not feasible in the next couple of hundred years.
It costs $200'000 to put a kilo of anything into space, cost aside , the type of energy and propulsion you are talking about dosnt exist. We don't have the capability to rotate the ISS for a day with the technology we have. Possibly thousands of years before we can do something of the magnitude you are talking about.
Go read the wiki page on artificial gravity. You don’t need forward propulsion, only rotation. These ideas already exist, they’ve been tested on a small scale that we know how to do them on a bigger scale.
And of course it doesn’t exist, 30 years ago the internet didn’t exist. It costs that much to put a kilo into space today, what will it cost in 20, 30 or even 100 years? I think your vastly underestimating the exponential growth of technology. Children use iPads with more computing power that the Apollo mission to watch Ryan’s toys videos.
Wikipedia, hahaha.
Artificial gravity needs acceleration.
Google the Equivalence Principle.
Googled it, it’s mentioned in the Wikipedia and actually supports my point that you don’t need acceleration, just rotational
“ Artificial gravity is the creation of an inertial force that mimics the effects of a gravitational force, usually by rotation. Artificial gravity, or rotational gravity, is thus the appearance of a centrifugal force in a rotating frame of reference (the transmission of centripetal acceleration via normal force in the non-rotating frame of reference), as opposed to the force experienced in linear acceleration, which by the equivalence principle is indistinguishable from gravity.”
I think you may have watched Interstellar to many times.
It’s right there in black and white, if you’ve nothing to add other than to laugh at wiki and mention a film I guess the convo is over "
Yes , gravity and acceleration are equivalent.
Are you saying that we accelerate 9.2 m/s to create 1g? Then stay in a constant state of 1g momentum?
As you said, we would not be traveling, just completely still in space? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Stop blaming third world people for all our ills.
It’s rich westerners that are causing climate change. The millions of Africa might erode forests but consumption is pushing up the carbon dioxide.
With reference to climate change the big three are china USA Russia and India. The UK contributes 1.1% to the green house effect while china contributes around 27 percent"
That's a big 4 not 3? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
“ For example, to produce standard gravity, g0 = 9.8 m/s2 with a rotating spacecraft period of 15 s, the radius of rotation would have to be 56 m (184 ft), while a period of 30 s would require it to be 224 m (735 ft). ”
My understanding of that is that no acceleration in a given direction is needed to simulate gravity, only rotation.
Have I misunderstood |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen
I doubt we will solve the problem of artificial gravity in that time frame but definitely in the long term. If we don't die from a plague or a famine we could survive after the earth is gone.
They already know how to do that. It’s called centrifugal force
How do you create enough trust to accelerate at a constant 1g?
An entire Space station travelling at that speed constantly rotating?
That problem won't be solved anytime soon.
Exactly that, the space station doesn’t need to be travelling, just rotating at enough speed to generate 1g of centrifugal force
In theory and practical it’s not that hard. It’s just expensive and not needed now. But in 100-200 years it could absolutely be viable and needed.
But it needs constant propulsion to create 1g. That's not feasible in the next couple of hundred years.
It costs $200'000 to put a kilo of anything into space, cost aside , the type of energy and propulsion you are talking about dosnt exist. We don't have the capability to rotate the ISS for a day with the technology we have. Possibly thousands of years before we can do something of the magnitude you are talking about.
Go read the wiki page on artificial gravity. You don’t need forward propulsion, only rotation. These ideas already exist, they’ve been tested on a small scale that we know how to do them on a bigger scale.
And of course it doesn’t exist, 30 years ago the internet didn’t exist. It costs that much to put a kilo into space today, what will it cost in 20, 30 or even 100 years? I think your vastly underestimating the exponential growth of technology. Children use iPads with more computing power that the Apollo mission to watch Ryan’s toys videos.
Wikipedia, hahaha.
Artificial gravity needs acceleration.
Google the Equivalence Principle.
Googled it, it’s mentioned in the Wikipedia and actually supports my point that you don’t need acceleration, just rotational
“ Artificial gravity is the creation of an inertial force that mimics the effects of a gravitational force, usually by rotation. Artificial gravity, or rotational gravity, is thus the appearance of a centrifugal force in a rotating frame of reference (the transmission of centripetal acceleration via normal force in the non-rotating frame of reference), as opposed to the force experienced in linear acceleration, which by the equivalence principle is indistinguishable from gravity.”"
My physics isn't that great but I'm sure your answer is there - centripetal acceleration. Acceleration requires force which requires energy.
Mr |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think that because we are part of Mother Nature not separate from her and she has a long history of cutting off limbs to preserve her main body we don't stand a chance in the long run."
Yes I agree. I think we are not in control of anything when it comes to mother nature. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen
I doubt we will solve the problem of artificial gravity in that time frame but definitely in the long term. If we don't die from a plague or a famine we could survive after the earth is gone.
They already know how to do that. It’s called centrifugal force
How do you create enough trust to accelerate at a constant 1g?
An entire Space station travelling at that speed constantly rotating?
That problem won't be solved anytime soon.
Exactly that, the space station doesn’t need to be travelling, just rotating at enough speed to generate 1g of centrifugal force
In theory and practical it’s not that hard. It’s just expensive and not needed now. But in 100-200 years it could absolutely be viable and needed.
But it needs constant propulsion to create 1g. That's not feasible in the next couple of hundred years.
It costs $200'000 to put a kilo of anything into space, cost aside , the type of energy and propulsion you are talking about dosnt exist. We don't have the capability to rotate the ISS for a day with the technology we have. Possibly thousands of years before we can do something of the magnitude you are talking about.
Go read the wiki page on artificial gravity. You don’t need forward propulsion, only rotation. These ideas already exist, they’ve been tested on a small scale that we know how to do them on a bigger scale.
And of course it doesn’t exist, 30 years ago the internet didn’t exist. It costs that much to put a kilo into space today, what will it cost in 20, 30 or even 100 years? I think your vastly underestimating the exponential growth of technology. Children use iPads with more computing power that the Apollo mission to watch Ryan’s toys videos.
Wikipedia, hahaha.
Artificial gravity needs acceleration.
Google the Equivalence Principle.
Googled it, it’s mentioned in the Wikipedia and actually supports my point that you don’t need acceleration, just rotational
“ Artificial gravity is the creation of an inertial force that mimics the effects of a gravitational force, usually by rotation. Artificial gravity, or rotational gravity, is thus the appearance of a centrifugal force in a rotating frame of reference (the transmission of centripetal acceleration via normal force in the non-rotating frame of reference), as opposed to the force experienced in linear acceleration, which by the equivalence principle is indistinguishable from gravity.”
My physics isn't that great but I'm sure your answer is there - centripetal acceleration. Acceleration requires force which requires energy.
Mr"
Ah maybe it is, I thought they were talking about acceleration in a direction, like in linear acceleration. My mistake.
I thought that’s what they meant when talking adopt the issue or being “still in space”. With centrifugal gravity we could orbit above a planet without the need to move outside of the rotation |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"“ For example, to produce standard gravity, g0 = 9.8 m/s2 with a rotating spacecra noft period of 15 s, the radius of rotation would have to be 56 m (184 ft), while a period of 30 s would require it to be 224 m (735 ft). ”
My understanding of that is that no acceleration in a given direction is needed to simulate gravity, only rotation.
Have I misunderstood "
Acceleration is a vector quantity it requires magnitude and direction.
In a vacuum to simulate gravity at 1g we need a momentum of 9.2 m/s.
It makes no sense to me when you say not traveling just rotating.
You mean just static in space rotating at 1g, and creating artificial gravity?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen
I doubt we will solve the problem of artificial gravity in that time frame but definitely in the long term. If we don't die from a plague or a famine we could survive after the earth is gone.
They already know how to do that. It’s called centrifugal force
How do you create enough trust to accelerate at a constant 1g?
An entire Space station travelling at that speed constantly rotating?
That problem won't be solved anytime soon.
Exactly that, the space station doesn’t need to be travelling, just rotating at enough speed to generate 1g of centrifugal force
In theory and practical it’s not that hard. It’s just expensive and not needed now. But in 100-200 years it could absolutely be viable and needed.
But it needs constant propulsion to create 1g. That's not feasible in the next couple of hundred years.
It costs $200'000 to put a kilo of anything into space, cost aside , the type of energy and propulsion you are talking about dosnt exist. We don't have the capability to rotate the ISS for a day with the technology we have. Possibly thousands of years before we can do something of the magnitude you are talking about.
Go read the wiki page on artificial gravity. You don’t need forward propulsion, only rotation. These ideas already exist, they’ve been tested on a small scale that we know how to do them on a bigger scale.
And of course it doesn’t exist, 30 years ago the internet didn’t exist. It costs that much to put a kilo into space today, what will it cost in 20, 30 or even 100 years? I think your vastly underestimating the exponential growth of technology. Children use iPads with more computing power that the Apollo mission to watch Ryan’s toys videos.
Wikipedia, hahaha.
Artificial gravity needs acceleration.
Google the Equivalence Principle.
Googled it, it’s mentioned in the Wikipedia and actually supports my point that you don’t need acceleration, just rotational
“ Artificial gravity is the creation of an inertial force that mimics the effects of a gravitational force, usually by rotation. Artificial gravity, or rotational gravity, is thus the appearance of a centrifugal force in a rotating frame of reference (the transmission of centripetal acceleration via normal force in the non-rotating frame of reference), as opposed to the force experienced in linear acceleration, which by the equivalence principle is indistinguishable from gravity.”
My physics isn't that great but I'm sure your answer is there - centripetal acceleration. Acceleration requires force which requires energy.
Mr"
clear as mud. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mma29Couple
over a year ago
wirral |
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution
Unless technology is invented that enables us to travel to the other parts of the universe and we find a planet we can inhabit it's irrelevant what we achieve here. The earth was not made to last.
The earth wasn’t made to last is like, a very long time in the future. We absolutely can make technology within the next 100-200 years that can outlast the planet though
We absolutely have the power to create our own version of a planet with artificial gravity, huge solar farms, nuclear power and facilities to make food, fresh water and oxygen
I doubt we will solve the problem of artificial gravity in that time frame but definitely in the long term. If we don't die from a plague or a famine we could survive after the earth is gone.
They already know how to do that. It’s called centrifugal force
How do you create enough trust to accelerate at a constant 1g?
An entire Space station travelling at that speed constantly rotating?
That problem won't be solved anytime soon.
Exactly that, the space station doesn’t need to be travelling, just rotating at enough speed to generate 1g of centrifugal force
In theory and practical it’s not that hard. It’s just expensive and not needed now. But in 100-200 years it could absolutely be viable and needed.
But it needs constant propulsion to create 1g. That's not feasible in the next couple of hundred years.
It costs $200'000 to put a kilo of anything into space, cost aside , the type of energy and propulsion you are talking about dosnt exist. We don't have the capability to rotate the ISS for a day with the technology we have. Possibly thousands of years before we can do something of the magnitude you are talking about.
Go read the wiki page on artificial gravity. You don’t need forward propulsion, only rotation. These ideas already exist, they’ve been tested on a small scale that we know how to do them on a bigger scale.
And of course it doesn’t exist, 30 years ago the internet didn’t exist. It costs that much to put a kilo into space today, what will it cost in 20, 30 or even 100 years? I think your vastly underestimating the exponential growth of technology. Children use iPads with more computing power that the Apollo mission to watch Ryan’s toys videos.
Wikipedia, hahaha.
Artificial gravity needs acceleration.
Google the Equivalence Principle.
Googled it, it’s mentioned in the Wikipedia and actually supports my point that you don’t need acceleration, just rotational
“ Artificial gravity is the creation of an inertial force that mimics the effects of a gravitational force, usually by rotation. Artificial gravity, or rotational gravity, is thus the appearance of a centrifugal force in a rotating frame of reference (the transmission of centripetal acceleration via normal force in the non-rotating frame of reference), as opposed to the force experienced in linear acceleration, which by the equivalence principle is indistinguishable from gravity.”"
Your both wrong. General Zod just used a world engine.
And it would of worked if superman hadn't got involved.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think that because we are part of Mother Nature not separate from her and she has a long history of cutting off limbs to preserve her main body we don't stand a chance in the long run."
In this age of PC utopia is it not correct that we ‘drop’ the mother from nature and call it simply nature? Asking for a friend.
As to the premise: Yes agree we are long overdue a correction event. Our (human) mastery of science and technology has enabled us to break the boundaries of the self regulating ecosystem to the pooing where we’re in real danger of causing a huge collapse. Whether it will be precipitated for political ends or occur naturally who knows. It has happened before and will happen again. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Stop blaming third world people for all our ills.
It’s rich westerners that are causing climate change. The millions of Africa might erode forests but consumption is pushing up the carbon dioxide."
Is OP blaming 3rd world?
And in the grand scheme of things is the 3rd world even part of the long term survival of humanity? None in the 3rd world have a space programme that can get us off this rock when the time comes? We’ve not enough resources to sustain everyone.
Not a nice thought though. But I’m betting those in power have had it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Humans have taken control away from mother nature. The earth is possibly beyond the point of repair.
On a sour note in a couple of billion years the sun will expand to where Venus now is and the planet will be fried.
We are fucked. Mother Nature can't help.
"
If ‘mother nature’ is shorthand for science and the rules of the universe, then we have nature’ support ij the form of opportunity, resources and time to escape. If without hat timeframe we fk ourselves over or can’t figure it out, then we’ve reached the end of the road and don’t need to escape anyway, for what is the purpose of enduring to persist on the same rock discussing bullshit on a forum day in day out.
Evolve and expand or die trying  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Humans have taken control away from mother nature. The earth is possibly beyond the point of repair.
On a sour note in a couple of billion years the sun will expand to where Venus now is and the planet will be fried.
We are fucked. Mother Nature can't help.
If ‘mother nature’ is shorthand for science and the rules of the universe, then we have nature’ support ij the form of opportunity, resources and time to escape. If without hat timeframe we fk ourselves over or can’t figure it out, then we’ve reached the end of the road and don’t need to escape anyway, for what is the purpose of enduring to persist on the same rock discussing bullshit on a forum day in day out.
Evolve and expand or die trying "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution "
Species won’t go out that easy. But I can easily see a vastly reduced population being needed once advanced robotics, true AI etc comes viable. I can easily see a situation where the 97% or bulk of them (us?) are surplus to needs.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The human race has a few hundred years left at most
A few hundred years ago people died from a scratch and electricity hadn’t been invent. In the last 75 years alone we’ve gone from basic electronics to every person on earth (nearly) carrying a super computer in their pocket.
The advancement of technology is exponential. Don’t be surprised if within the next 100 years we have another tech/energy based revolution na I don't agree. The human race has been on earth approximately 200000 years and Wath has been around for almost 7 billion (maybe wrong) but we are literally a blink in the grand scheme of things. Our time is almost up
Not much of a disagreement but fair enough
I think in the next 100-200 years technology will evolve to the point we won’t need a planet anymore. "
Not that long until 2063 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andonmessMan
over a year ago
A world all of his own |
I rather think that Agent Smith had it right (well, the script writers!) in his interrogation of Morpheus in The Matrix. I won't paraphrase it as I'll probably just make a mess of it, so, to quote
"I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Well since I discovered forum's round about lockdown time, I've read some epics, but this one is like war and peace, leaving me thinking that we don't need super powers to take a pop at each other, when you could start world war three over the debate on this website. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I rather think that Agent Smith had it right (well, the script writers!) in his interrogation of Morpheus in The Matrix. I won't paraphrase it as I'll probably just make a mess of it, so, to quote
"I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague."
"
I've been highlighting that for years |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I remember years ago, on Have I Got News For You, a recount of an interview with Prince Philip. When asked if reincarnation was possible, what he would return as, he reportedly said, A deadly disease, so he could cure overpopulation in one fell swoop.
Maybe it happened!
C |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
