PB666

But that is all this line of propaganda ever brings forth, alot of implicit wording with vacuous support of. And more importantly to me, the more I hear these excremental arguments, the more I believe the reverse is true, that life is exceedingly rare. The kepler selected planets that get the focus are those that fit the criteria, planets more than a certain distance from their star (such as in the Pluto range) are exceedingly difficult to see because the probability that they transect goes down with distance because the angular of deviation from the line of site increases distance in and above the width of the star with distance. Thus they are getting better of looking for earth like planets, but the evidences of Earths is becoming less and less probable. Which puts me into a defensible logical circumstance of not believing any of what the proponents say until they prove it. Alot of people are over enthusiatic about life's potential, we see this again in the thread about Titan. They are putting all sense and good science aside to support the enthusiam but they are proporting existence of life, where on Earth, nothing lives except in a dormant or cyst state, placing everything we know about organic chemistry aside to support non-existent special chemistry. Since I know the proponents will not look the articles up . . . . . This does limit life of course, you can have life at high temperatures and high hydrostatic pressures (hydro meaning water or fluid), but the reverse is not true very low temperatures are not acceptable.

The teleforce can work, the others not so, the teleforce has two problems. First the why and the how it to leave something in the polluted air long enough, ususually a few minutes it starts developing an invisible patina, while highly valuable on antiquities, in the world of electron microscopy its a pest. When you place these metals in a vacuum, the patina wants to go back into the vacuum but lack the kinetic energy to do so, it you distarge a high voltage they gain the energy and colored discharge occurs, ussually a avocado green color is a mixturs of several gases. The problem is that in air it doesn,t happen. So imagine that each of these particles is carrying a charge, the are accelerating to thousands of miles in the distance of a few microns. You cant do this with metal objects, you can create a type of capaciter the carries a charge, it can accelerate, but in this case you are accelerate an atoms thickness of gas on a metals surface, so the electrostatic reserve has to be much greater, at 10,000s it would be simply dangerous, the rate of acceleration will be far less. While the amps would not be that great the type of power being produced would be simply dangerous. The second problem is that while in a vacuum everything works great, if you trash through a chamber at 4000 miles per hour your chamber wont be a vacuum chamber, so that you would have to have a high speed aperture that closes behind the projectile, one in front that opens after the projectile leaves closes again, evacuates, then the interior aperature reopens. This would take a few seconds. Is essence this is a magnetic mass accelerator with the magnets replaced by a charge. Neither are used.

Skimming? ChEaTeR.

Banned for coveting a avatar change.

-46 (-)

ETC changed evolution it did not stop evolution. How fast do you think free radical based evolution is going to occur on a world that has a redox potential (roughly not definable in an apolar solvent) of -400 and a temperature of -100 or less? My point was, that if you change many aspects of the environment: 1) Temperature, 2) Redox potential (lower), 3) Surface pressure 4) UV/light potentials. That you have a really frozen surface were radiative evolution from the interior is neglible and there is no reason to expects that even the simplist things would evolve. Given the lack of oxygen and lack of mitochondria, one source of aging virtually disappears, when you drop blue/light UV down to miniscule levels a second source disappears, the only thing left is cosmic radiation. Since we don't have water we don't have replication enzymes, so we can't really compare DNA replication fidelity, and in any case at those temperatures they are pretty much not moving. Quoting myself in context The key word is In Eucaryotes, not in eucaryotic organelles, but in eucaryotes themselves systems replicate by a complex process that eventuall results in some sort of embryogenesis. The point however is that single cell organisms can live in communities that share the same function, and lethal mutations do occur that cause death. But just as there are many mitochondria in each cell, the healthy cells can replace themselves. More importantly there is only 16384 +/- 10 nt of human mtDNA, there is 3x10^9 bp of DNA, and although the rate for free radicals is higher the genome is tolerant about about 10 to 100 mutations per generation before something really risky damage is done, if you had anywhere near the rate of mutation that occurs in the HVR of mtDNA, our genome would be cooked. One of the major proteins built do defend the mt is the ERCC6 which is made by the nucleus and shipped into mt. So not only is the nucleus just defending itself, its defending the mitochondria also. During periods in which cells are rapidly mutating such mutations increase, such as in spermatogenisis in males. But that and other forces limit the finite lifetimes of eucaryotes, particular those with higher metabolisms. Specifically by the time a male is in his 60s (lower for chimpanzees), the spermatazoa have accumulated sufficiently large enough mutations as to make reproduction risk for multiple diseases (autism, schizophrenia). Mitochondria in the cell do die, and they do release free radicals in the process, and thus there is a defensive system, but during periods of environmental stress this can increase, such as migrating into an enviroment that requires more per day calorie consumption due to thermal losses. Compensatory mutations are expected and observed in the human mitochondrial DNA. Thus when I say system, i mean system, not your favorite child organelle. The system undergoes recombination as a consequence of the finiteness of life that the system produces. The system has created a process (i.e. the eucaryotic organism) that relies on one step of meiosis during germ-cell replication. No goalpost has changed, this is how eucaryotes cheat death, at least until lineages go extinct, by sharing recombinant DNA between diverse future generations. But in cheating death, they have to die and in fact apoptosis is built into all stages of life. Bacterial can also share, including mitochondria is some species but not most higher mammals, but that is not germane to the argument, because for bacteria its more or less opportunistic. There are very few higher eurcaryotes that are parthenogenic, where has fissile replication is the standard organism replacement scheme in bacteria. The great oxygenation event was a game changer for life on earth. It is not plausible on a non-photosynthetic world. It drives the ability to produce energy in process like endothery. The types of energy produced that can be devoted to new evolutionary process greatly increases. Genes undergo duplications, take on new functions, etc. The nervous system developes, the primary function of the system is taxis and muscle activity. Things like eating, swimming, again not possible without a thermodynamic potential between food sources and products. So on Titan endothermy, taxis, etc pretty much out of the question. Taxis is driven by ATP, again not available. So you get down to the components that make life complex, not available. Species that cannot burn oxygen, for example anaerobes, still exist in large numbers, but in the biosphere these are delegated to restricted areas of the ecosystem were metabolism is very slow. And so now you are down to the rates of life of things that live on top of petroleum formations that have division times in the 1000s of year range . . . . evolutions stops.

-45 (-)

Talk about misreading a post. Naer did is say that mitochondrial recombination is the result. What I said and explained in full is recombinative replication, as in the system, not the cell, as in meiosis, not simple fission. ROS can come from mitochondria and from other sources, but it IS, as the so-called "Science spam" elucidated, a source of aging within the cells. It is undoubtably the major source of aging, and without a doubt the redundant ROS modulating species disappear, it becomes the source of cell death. It is the primary reason that immune cells use superoxide dismutase and ROS generation to kill intruders. P.S. I read your post, I wonder if you actually read mine.

The probe gets lost after flying by Jool as the objects don't exist. I send a signal to place the probes back on course so that the collide over Eeloo, as to study the composition of explodium in Eeloos lower atmosphere.

-43 (-)

Where did I say mitochondria or bacteria could not undergo recombination. Meiosis is built largely into eucaryotic replicative system, and bacteria recombination is largely opportunistic. That means that in complex eucaryotes, life span is driven by then needs of recombination, in bacteria, lifespan is largely irrelevant. Your statement about ROS is wrong. ROS production does damage eucaryotic DNA, and it is the major reason for the production of thioredoxin and glutathion within the cell, a process that requires energy expenditure in order to neutralize free radicals and prevent them from damaging cytosolic machinary. The redox potential inside the cytosol is maintained at -240 mV when the cell is proliferating and DNA is replicating. Catching the species before they leave the mitochondria is also important. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ERCC6 does both. We can contrast with the environment outside the cell in Seawater of 300 to 500 mV a difference of 1/2 to 1 volt in potential. And the extracellular environment. While there is a thousand papers on the topic. The point is that the Host cell has numerous mechanisms. 1. Scavenging - NADPH / thioredoxin / thioredoxin reductase, based reduction of glutathion 2. Repair - ERCC6 base-pair excision and replace, collectively UV radiation, free radical damage repair. Ann Hepatol. 2016 Mar-Apr;15(2):160-73. doi: 10.5604/16652681.1193701. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2015 Dec 1;309(11):L1367-75. doi: 10.1152/ajplung.00236.2015. Epub 2015 Oct 2. As Redox related mitochondrial produced DNA damage as a process of the inflammasome and apoptosis. Redox Biol. 2015 Dec;6:472-85. doi: 10.1016/j.redox.2015.09.005. Epub 2015 Sep 10. Cell Biol Int. 2016 Feb;40(2):166-76. doi: 10.1002/cbin.10549. Epub 2015 Oct 13. J Biol Chem. 2015 Nov 6;290(45):27425-37. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M115.667063. Epub 2015 Sep 28. The most important thing here, is that when the protective machinery inside the cells is turned off, the cells degrade, this is often part of immune drive apoptosis. But more importantly, if the body consider the cells defective or infected, the immune system cannot often distinguish the two (a partial impetus for autoimmune disease - as a result you will read about ROS involved in autoimmune disease, and may be an impetus for anti-DNA antibodies in lupus), the ROS route of cell death is advantageous because it places infecting cells (i.e anaerobes and facultative anaerobes) at risk. It should be noted that one paper postulated that because the rate of metabolism for heat production is higher in colder climates, that is the reason why mammalian cold climate species evolve slightly faster (this has been observed in human mitochondria, with slowest rates of evolution in Africa (L5 branch) and fastest rates of evolution for people who passed through temperate or arctic climate, B and D1-4 branches), resulting in the purifying selection/directional evolution arguement), but by the same token, tend to go extinct more quickly. Contrarily there is the potency that replicative machinery makes no mistakes and is completely protective from ROS. My own unpublished studies revealed that the number of mutations at rarely mutated sites increased with land travel distances from L5, the highest being the route through Beringia to South America, with a mean DT between L0k lineage of greater than 2.6 million years (about 10 times faster than expected and there were several lineages of comparable age) for the 3 of 20 bins that contained sites evolved most slowly in eutheria. In each of these bins there where 100s of mutations detected, the fastest rate of change was in the Arctic peoples, thus it appears the ROS activity and direction and purifying selection all acted on evolution of mtDNA. Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol. 2002 Aug;132(4):739-61. Proc Biol Sci. 2009 Oct 7;276(1672):3447-55. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2009.0752. Epub 2009 Jul 8. Biochem J. 2007 Jun 1;404(2):345-51. Wright, S., Keeling, J., and Gillman, L. (2006). The road from Santa Rosalia: A faster tempo of evolution in tropical climates. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103:7718-7722. http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2006/05/evolution-gets-hot-and-steamy I stand by what I said, and science is not about guessing, saying that life should exist on a cold Titan is nothing more than a really bad guess. So I have put up my science, where's yours?

Oh please not them, close video.

Since KSP is a game in the unity game engine its dimensions are limited to 3 spatial, and therefore you died. End game.

RC pilots have to have skill generally take their hobby seriously and the planes are very expensive and unless you are under the glide path of a airport are generally out of danger range.] Any fool with 200 buck can go out an by a four propeller drone and fly it right out the box into the engine of a commercial aircraft. And more importantly people have done stupid things with their drones, alot more than those who have stupid things with their drones. The perfect solution for drones is a 12 gauge with game load replaced by table sugar.

Thermodynamics is the driving force of life, but to achieve thermodynamic potential one has to overcome kinetic energy barriers. Enzymes do this by lowering the transition state energy maximum that would otherwise be overcome by alternative reactions or slower rate or higher temperature. Without self replicating catalysis of the system there can be no life. To have it you have to have a system that can do this. As far as I know, no such low transition energy tolerant system exists. Thermodynamics is the driving force, but kinetics makes it possible. What are the energy drivers. ADP ---> ATP and NADP (NAD) -------> NADPH (NADH). These absolutely do not have to be the drivers, but the problem is that at very low temperatures you cannot have the energy per bond that you can get at higher temperatures. The particular problem is the H: moiety, without it one would find it excessively difficult to polymerize. But at those energies you do not have the ability to overcome the kinetic barriers. The only two enzymes that we know of are RNA and protiens, both need an environment containing water. Of the two proteins are most potent, anyone who studies X-ray crystallography knows that enymes are surrounded by water and frequently are involved in the transtion state themselves, many of the most potent enzymes have metal cofactors in the binding site, and rely on the transition state oxidation states and complex non-covelant bond structure to achieve catalysis in which water participates in those reactions. The potency of these reactions elevates rate, and also elevates the rate of evolution. In Eucaryotes this is particularly important because the electron transport chain is a major source of mutations that drive evolution and a major impetus for recombinative replciation versus simple fission. There is an idea in evolution that the rate of evolutionary diversification occurs fastest in the tropics. The driving force of evolution is light and permissive heat, for example one way animals survive in cold climate is to go into dormancy. The thermodynamic potential created by wavelengths that create transition state radicals is what drives very precise energy flow from hv into conversion of O-H bonds X-H bonds. This then is the major driver of the rest of the ecosystem. If you look at the lowest boiling point alcohols, around -100c. But these do not crystallize like water, but go through an amorphous transition state at very low temperatures, for example at below −78.5'C (the temperature of dry ice), 100% ethanol becomes thick like honey. So that our lowest potential OH bond now diffuses at an incredibly slow rate even before reaching. However at very low diffusion rates its difficult to transfer energy. Therefore the ability to use X-H bonds or build X-H bonds at such temperatures is limited. Again, you might find something, a reaction or an interaction below -50'C but it won't be complex, you wont find systems, and whatever you find, compared to Earth, would be unevolved, because it lacks two driving principles, thermodynamics (hv in sunlight) and permissive kinetics. The thermodynamics of titans limits the energy of bond formation, and the kinetics limits the rate life evolves. The fact that Titan is relatively small, means that its interior and mineral crust is probably rock solid and cold. Not the conditions that would predict life. Given it a pass. Europa , Enceladus maybe. I still think people are over enthusiastic about the potential, but since the subsurface volcanic potentials of both are black swans, the outer ends of probability suggest that a finding of life would not be entirely unexpected.

The problem is, and we take advantage of this in the lab, that below -10'C biological reactions slow to hideous rates. In a glycerol for example, enzymes can be kept active in freezer for years at around -20'c, not frozen but also active at such a low rate they are essentially stopped. To preserve cells you can keep them alive in DMSO at below -50'c for a long time, and in liquid nitrogen essentially forever. The biggest problem for cells are the membranes, which are largely non-polar in nature. Basically below -50'C everything stops. Life requires complexity, but below -50'C all the complex components are essentially stopped, not active, and limited to diffusion at slow rates, redox reactions (the back bone of energy production in living organisms), the overwhelming majority would take millions of years to complete. There is a zone between 10'C and around -10'C where you can have super organisms, such as found in the ocean. This is because they live off of reduced oxidation and they tend to accumulate oil (very difficult to burn at such low temperatures). Animals that live at these temperatures tend to accumulate alot of fat, particularly the omega-3 fats as these are very cold tolerant fats. Because of the low rates of oxidation they tend not to age, and tend to grow extremely large, but that -10'C is a critical point because of the rate of metabolism gets too low, such organisms become prey to warm blooded air-breathing creatures with large stores of insulating fat. below -20'C the cryoprotectants required become so profound that systems cannot function, DNA cannot replicate, all kinds of bad things. Of course their can allways be something that can be active at -30'C, but much below that, no.

Granted, but only on the exact opposite side of the world where you stand. I wish pi was a whole number.

Unfortunately your previous attack failed to destroy the Zkraken that have spread throughout the Kerbol galaxy chasing rogue spaceships. The have evolved into the Zraken and are mad as hell because of the nanoassembler attacked their kind, they have swarmed back into the kerbol system, haven consumed comets and other space debris and multiplied. Having grown in numbers by the trillions, they swarm back and use the nanoassembler affinity to bind to them, attempting to consume the DNA they become irreversibly locked down and the Zraken then dive into Kerbol, destroying every single last one of the Nanoassemblers (either in our outside of the kerbol system). One billion of these grab the squidy skin and stretch it out to the size of Jool and then plunge into Kerbol, vaporizing the rocket squid. The remainder take Dres and gently push it into extra-kerbol orbit. The next 5 poster attack is completely neutralized, and the system is now free of all squidy-forms. The Zraken now have a perpetual lifeforce of their own found a computer chip with PB666's entire genetic code, they then reconstitute PB666 and implant the DNA into a derilict female kerbol in a lost ship, therefore creating another PB666, the small kerbal is then implanted in a the Zkraken matriarch in deep interstellar space, who then commutes the entire history of the kerbol system into PB666 brain including all previous attacks and technologies. Learning of this the two design a super-stealth deep space vessel that is undetectable, using local debris they spawn a pentillion small ships that patrol the edge of the kerbol system looking for Rocket Squid crafts. Some having completed this process they reported back to the Zkraken matriarch, who then recreates the Kraken-1A prototype and the new Zraken-B type that comsumes any biologic it finds in the system, particularly looking for rocket squid spawn.

Banished for banning the banner of the moderator.

And so they are called therapods. Interesting isn't it. Dinosaurs are a subset of therapods. Edit, I should say some Dinosaurs are theropods, obviously there are some non-saurichian dinosaurs. Ornithischia. As the wiki article on dinosaurs explains using the word "Avian dinosaur" creates unnecessary confusion. thera - beast pod - feet There are large therapod megafauna (dinosaurs) and just plain fauna. Maniraptora (extant), Alvarezsauroidea (extinct)

RL10A-4-2 EV 4.42 km/s T/W = 61:1 T=99.1k M = 167kg Drawbacks - liquid H2. (tanks are heavy) RL10B-2 EV 4.58 km/s T/W = 40:1 T=110k M = 277kg Drawbacks - liquid H2. (tanks are heavy) Merlin 1Dv EV 3.48 km/s T/W = 190.1 T =934k M ~ 500kg Drawback - 3,2 times as heavy as 10A-4-2, B-2, respectively. But produces 10 time the thrust. ISP = 75% of B-2

No, not just because of the temperature, but because of something K2 did not mention. On earth you have a polar solvent and non-polar solvent. Polar solvents are mostly limited to above the freezing point of salt water. Non-polar solvents can really exist at any temperature above the freezing point of methane gas, there are non-polar solvents for all seasons. Life is strung between the two,literally. Problem is at liq.methane temperatures there are no polar solvents. Protein folding, polar/non-polar interactions. 2nd problem is that organic reactions increase rate with 2x for every 10'C. There have been some molecular biologist that claim, basically between -20'C and -50'C even if you put the very best cryogenic agents, everything comes to a dead stop. 3rd problem, the ever defining lipid bilayers, they don't like temperatures below -20'C Thats the short list of reasons. Geothermal vents deep under the frozen shell of water on Titan, you might find poorly developed life, life deep in its crust. There is enough atmosphere, it would utilize sulfites and nitrites and be turned over but the latent heat in the crust, but given titans small size there may not be much. Titan, basically is strung together because of it distance from the sun, in a volatile substance trap for things that are liberated from passing comets and from planets of the inner solar system (like mercury, venus and mars). If there was substantial heat coming from its core it would evolve more gas. So I think life on titan would be hard to find and fragile. Human life on titan. I would just remind that at liquid methane/nitrogen temperatures, its as hard as hell to keep the cold out, liquid anything colder than water burns the skin and fast.

You could not enclose the universe into a shell because of aspects of the universe. Whike the universe slowed or stopped its inflation 13.8 billion years ago, there is a vacuous momentum component to space-time largely governed by the momentum of matter and energy within. It so bad that if you tried to contain our local group of galaxies the forces therein would tear the walls aprt the second you completed. On the universal scales if you could momentarily assert a sphere a finite distance at that very instance it would shatter due to the stretch forces. Even building an orbiting ring structure around the sun has to deal with the ripples of space time that travel through our system and the rolling forces that jupiter and saturn exert. The other aspect is that -time has no meaning away from comoving space-time reference frame, in fact a distances far enough away from us that their current velocity is such that thier light can never reach us it makes no sense to argue with them where the edge of a universe might be, because you and they could never agree upon time, and you could coordinate the building of such a sphere, you could not even coordinate the planning of building such a device, because if you were in the center you could never reach the edge, and if were on the edge you could never communiate with other visible universe edge locations that there was an intent to build. Its so bad a problem you could not even plan the build of a ring around our galaxy, simply because of the variances of time for different reference frames. Finally, the mass of a wall that would contain the universe would have so much energy it would exceed the energy of the universe itself. For example it is suggested that at the end of inflation the edge of the universe was moving away from the center at 3c. This is allowable because the motion pertains to spacetime and no mass existed at that time, the energy of the universe was all in quantum space time. Mass pours into an expanding space time reference frames after inflation stops, which means that the mass relative to the center is so fast that only the visible universe is visible to us, lol, the majority of our universe can never-ever be seen. If we assume that 5% of the universe is mass, there is an inadequate energy in the universe to slow the mass down as to bind them together. Likwise you could not decelerate the wall pieces either, there is inadequate energy to do that. And most importantly, because of the limit of field propogation you can never place all the pieces in a stopped reference frame, the theoretically central reference frame, it simply can never be done.

5 core FH has the advantage that the central core can does not have to be active at launch, and you can use the merlin space engines on the core stage, wasting it but with one hell of alot of second stage power to burn. Its equivilent to adding a full stage. For heavier loads you can simply burn up the central core for 10 seconds or so, shut it down and reignite when the 4 side engines are kicked off. The problem with 4 core landings is that if you make the gravity turns, its hard as heck to get back to a ground landing, which means you either have to attempt 4 landings on one barge or have 4 barges to land on. If you ran asparagas you could land two on the ground and two on two barges (or two very precise landings on opposite sides of one barge), but that requires igniting the core engines once the 2 were released. Its still going to be huge benefit though because once the other 2 are released the 2 that remain are going to power up a rocket that once complete

It is and it isn't. It isn't a subsidy in that NASA ultimately benefits if SpaceX is successful, and they are paying at least something to use gov't launch facilities and it makes it looks good that the taxpayers investment in Canaveral is bring back jobs to the good ole US of A while using something that is essentially retired public space. SpaceX is launching both US used and non-US used equipment, So from that point of view we are subsidizing Thailand's satellites, which is OK we can write that off as international support. It is a subsidy in the sense that SpaceX will eventually have a second launch facility and they will be launching stuff from other countries and companies from that facility with a good deal of independence from NASA, but if NASA needs a whole lot of payload in space for a interplanetary mission then they benefit from having a number of independent launch facilities on US turf. IF the F9 is really the cheapest means of getting fuel into LEO, then that's what you want. SpaceX and NASA are like neighbor kids taking a bath together, under the soap suds is difficult to know where one ends and the other begins. And BTW, if you take a look at the relationship between Boeing or some of the other defense tech firms you will find that there are more cozier relationships. At least with NASA you have transparency, with the defense launches you are going to lose alot of that. Oh sure we will know the cost someday, but not right away.