PB666

Until the last person with direct first hand knowlrdge dies, subsequently until you have a wriiten language it gets mythified every 20 years, until the 8080 is forgotten and peaolpe only remember the magical touch screen of the Ipad. So that will do you when you want to build a simple network to send information in rs232 at 200 baud.

That's still not nothing.. There are several technological cycles required to get to steel production. Food cycles, domestication cycles, natural product extraction cycles just to get electrical smelting operations, 10 to 20 years. Once there its a matter of ramping up coal fired power plants. So we are talking minimally 60 years. And btw, all the schematics for building things, all now stored on computers. They are lost, anything that does not have a paper copy would be lost. And to copy paper, you have to build paper making and printing technologies. So the ability to distribute information basically collapses to hand transported and people hovering over diagrams in library transcribing (pencil technology, iron gaul ink technology) until you have a modem and an 8088 or Z80 processor. By the time we got to the point we could actually build an 8088, all the people who would have been familiar with its manufacturing would be long dead, so you hope that you made paper and writing quickly as to understand what they did to make those chips.

I have a better nuclear power plant idea, this one has a very simple design. First find a gravitational rounded object, since this is going to be hydrogen rich, just make it large enough so the heat and pressure at its center produces a low density fusion reaction. Eventually the binding energy will produce a high frequency radiation, that way you dont have to cool it. The heat does all the work for you. Then just put your ships at a safe distance and collect the hv, no need to dissipate waste heat, it will radiate off the back of the collection panels. :^)

What you are considering is a Hohmann of maximum efficiency. If minmus was an earth moon and earth were kerbin (obviousl an object at 50 million meter from earth is only 50,000 km, only a quarter of the distance to our moon) is that the orbital velocity of minums is so slow that the last quarter of the transfer takes most of the time, while efficient, if you wanted to waste a couple 100 dv you could markedly speed up the transfer. in the case of leaving kerbin you start out at 2900 with zero radial velocity, this builds to a max around 1500 m/s radial and slows quickly to a few 100. If you can double or triple the radial velocity crossing minmus orbit that very slow leg approaching minmus can be spead up, trimming up to 1/3 rd off the time of flight off.

The beauty of properly designed breeder reacters is you get power, therefore you don't need to mine more and react more U and you deplete the waste. Even the depleted waste if concentrated enough continues to create power. Bury it deep enough and you can after a few years start generating geothermal power from it. Just that little pesky issue of bleed off radioactivity from things like radon, but radon can be trapped and stored separately.

http://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2015/10/16/449106501/did-life-begin-on-mars

Breeder reacters, reuse the radioactivity.

If it were at GSO it would take 1000s of years for the radioactivity to reach earth, much would have decayed. Spread over most of the surface if the earth it woukd hardly be noticed. If it broke up on reentry over the pacific most of the waste would end up going to the bottom of the sea. The worst case scenario would be someone was dumb enough to put a reactor in LEO say 150 miles, then some one else came along and detonated it from all sides causing a brief prompt critical event, very unstable and very inefficient nuclear bomb. Unlike chernobyl, the is no ground to meltdown into, there is nothing closeby in space, fallout is spread globally. Its a mess but except for a limited area where the largest material comes down, not to much of a problem. The US and russia detonated a large number of bombs in the 60s, many of the were Large hydrogen bombs whose waste goes intonthe stratosphere, C14 levels bumped up afterward, largely the effects went unnoted. The not so big secret is that the earth is constantly being bombarded with radioactivity, things like tritium, c14' iridium are not from earth, a nice size asteroid of the type that hits the earth every few thousand years will bring more radioactivity than the typical nuclear mishap.

http://www.ciclops.org/view_event/224/Enceladus-Flyby-Rev-223?js=1

But the light would have to be converted to microwave, and in the vacuum of space that has proven to be problematic. Third there are losses on the ground due to spread, absorption/radiation, reflection and thermal conversion. In space microwave power might prove useful for directing power to polar power stations, basically 3 inclined satellites that deliver power. 1/3 of time each to a power station. Other uses are redirecting light over the moon to a polar solar facility. The basic problem with power here on earth is that we have alot, but the current investment drive is weak. Lithium production needs to be ramped up several fold, fuel cell technology needs to be improved.

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-34516898 Its a video.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/entanglement-gravitys-long-distance-connection?tgt=nr So the basic ideal flows off the other thread, the theory of nothing, here you have our little universe in its single quantum state, something goes awry, So how does the universe try to keep itself together, entanglement. gravity, which some are now saying is a quantum tunnel. These virtual particles interact via tunnels in space and entanglement is the process. frankly i don't think the universe is doing a good job of holding itself together, it should do a whoops.

You can use a focal microwave transmitter and a ground based steam plant. Although there is no particular utility of doing this in space.

Yeah, becareful, particularly on the hand held. Keywords, double relativity, plancks time and length. The issue in my mind, what caused inflation.

The last time i checked google was not sending their suprcomputers to small laboratories sonthat they could have mainframe processing. BTW, if you check you google results, how accurate are they.

I don't know if this link is going to work or not. I dont even wantt to see the original paper. http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/612340/Origin-of-the-universe-riddle-solved-by-Canadian-physicists-and-er-it-wasn-t-God?utm_source=traffic.outbrain&utm_medium=traffic.outbrain&utm_term=traffic.outbrain&utm_content=traffic.outbrain&utm_campaign=traffic.outbrain Here's is the theory, once upon a undefinable time, there was a unit of quantum space. That quantum space had all the fluctuations everyone expects it to have then one day accidently inflation the inflation trapped quantum inflation. Dont shoot the messenger

So basically what you are saying is that since you can find one author in the field, a rather aged man at that, who still uses the term aether and who waxes philosophical anout its use, and even though at its prime it was as vague as scientific terms get you are still going to spew this nonsense out? Despite people telling you in good faith that there are more descriptive terms that have fewer attached 'baggage', you are still going to use this decidedly vague and obsolete nonsense. Yes or No question?

That link did not contain the quote, the personality page is one that any nickle/dime professor might have, whether or not he has a web page does not defend your fringe theory. The term was not absurb 100 years ago, its obsolete now, its about 60 years obsolete. The term was so heavily abused in the era of descriptive non-qualitative science. You can simply go to any science library and pick up the Journal of Biological Chemistry or any chemistry journal and read for your self. Beware of any poster who relies repeatedly on select authors or single papers as his source.

The first link is irrelevant, the form of propoganda is known as glittering personalities. The second link I posted previously in the thread. You should note that QM basically tolerates a deviation from relativistic physics at Planck's scale. And these theories, largely forgotten as they are unsupportable. The third item is something you repeated. Repeating large data blocks over and over again only shows a tiresome attitude that others take offense at.

It is rather innocent to believe that all data sets are published. The published data sets are the starting point, the referense set, each genome referenced adds SNPs in general I will not make those data sets public until after I publish or more likely, in the US, HIPAA may prevent authors from publishing these at all, therefore they will remain private to the study. After the results are digested they might publish the digest in supplimentary literatue. Rest anecdotes snipped as impertinent. - - - Updated - - - Thats the starting point then you might want to look for epistasis and expand to look at the environment variables and also look for epistasis. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistasis

It has a bad connotation in all the physical sciences, for good reason, it was abused. In addition there is no reason to use a word that can be cofused for 30 different things. As i posted these historical figures are talking about hidden variation, so you sould refer to it in its specific sense not in a generic sense that apllies also to 30unrelated science tpoics.

Ether is a disliked term because it was extensively abused in the 19th and 20th. I used to have to go gather papers 30 y ago and some of them were from the early 20th century. It is rather illuminating the nouns that were used to describe the unknowns. Ether, Aether etc was used to describe basically any system that behaved oddly under circumstances were you did not expect it to behave oddly. This was very far reaching, for example a protean with a high activity had an ether, transferred nucleic acid that imparted new qualities to an organism had an ether. The fact that it is used to name a chemical least of which is methoxy methane, is bad enough. IMO its a legacy word that is best left in science history.

Aether is a neologism, sort of. Its something that encapsulates the hidden variables, at least in his logic. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_(classical_element) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether IOW aether is the cause of that which would otherwise behave like a particle in motion to behave like a wave. This idea does not consider all the qualties of the EM feild intrinsic to light, a thus attributes some of the properties to be imparted by the vacuum.

the problem is the direction of the pole during the year and solr exposure. It may be true that the sun facing surface is unpleasantly hot, the unexposed surface is unpleasnatly cold. Anyway granrted there is very litlle choice since the lunar day is so long they will have to try someplace which has a midniggt sun year round.

Yes, in a system where the units have meaning to us, not while the unit of time is -43sec. Aside from that I think the hidden variables argument is based on a belief that statitstics alone will not suffice, and yet it does suffice, its called the laws of mass action. Since we cannot resolve quantum time then quantum motion or position will be equally unresolvable. I have to say this, the whole argument disappears if we just replace aether, wave and particle with feild, and simply state waves and particles are behaviors of the feild. The observers paradox is that when we detect we set a fixed criteria, such as a PMT it only accepts energy of a level, consequently a particle is detected. The observation forces what we detect, it is how the feild behaves during detection, and the slit behavior is how it behaves during transmission. Its just like saying my daughter is going to be married, chances are the husband will be a male. If we could not detect light, it would not also act as a particle, what would it be? nothing, a null. I don't have to understand every nuance of the feild to accept that it has differing bevahiors, just as if i can create a class on a computer that behaves like array or an object..... i can create nuances so can nature and so lets give QM its due and move on.