Green Baron

Yep, but in terms of game loop the formula does just what you proposed, it applies Lorentz to mass and thrust. It leaves the restmass unchanged. Too simple ? Einstein found out: E=m*c and reported that at lunch to a friend, a marketing person. He said: Come on, be bold ! How am i supposed to sell that ? E=m*c .... no we make it E=m*c². That sounds way better !" Einstein was deeply impressed. :-)

I may be stupid, but isn't it that acceleration for an interval t is ( (1-v*vt)*Thrust ) / ( gamma * restmass ). Coming close to c, thrust goes down, mass goes up. But i may be just too naive to see the problem, really ... sorry if this is a misunderstanding from my side. Agian, ninja'd. Shouldn't think so much and rather just write :-)

Edit: the text says the magnitude of v is the speed between 0 and c. Sooo .... very quick and very kerbal, don't blame my style :-) #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> // #include <math.h> int main( void ) { double gamma = 0.0, i = 0; for( i = 0; i < 1.01; i += 0.1 ) { gamma = ( 1 - i*i ); gamma *= gamma; gamma = 1 / gamma; printf( "At %2fc the mass is %5f\n", i, gamma ); } return EXIT_SUCCESS; } // main() At 0.000000c the mass is 1.000000 At 0.100000c the mass is 1.020304 At 0.200000c the mass is 1.085069 At 0.300000c the mass is 1.207584 At 0.400000c the mass is 1.417234 At 0.500000c the mass is 1.777778 At 0.600000c the mass is 2.441406 At 0.700000c the mass is 3.844675 At 0.800000c the mass is 7.716049 At 0.900000c the mass is 27.700831 At 1.000000c the mass is 20282409603651670423947251286016.000000 I really hope a physicist looks over this.

I fear i'm no specialist eithier (hoped one would show up), but from what i read the denominator c² is constant while the enumerator grows quadratical. What you could use ist the Tolman-Expression of mass of a moving body (from the wikipedia articel: m0(1 - v2/c2)^(−1/2), m0 is rest mass and the relativistic version of f=m*a: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/mass.html If that doesn't help then compute the mass for a given case once in intervals of let's say 0.1c until 0.8c and 0.01c for the rest and apply the curve to your spaceship. Kerbal style :-) Edit: i meant for a mass of 1, in order to obtain factors for multiplication.

I see. In that case you're probably fine with the relativistic momentum E https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy–momentum_relation and relativistic Mass Mrel = E/c² ... Looking forward to your results :-)

I expect it to be very difficult to model the different time frames of objects moving at relativistic speeds in relation to each other. That'll probably be the most challenging part .... ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relativity So i'd say as an answer: observed from on board that ship "no" (reaction mass increases as well). Viewed from outside "yes". I think ... but i'm sure a specialist will show up soon. Edit: partly ninja'd :-)

Actually there is a hypothesis (don't have a link right now but if you search you'll find) that assumes catastrophies as a motor of evolution. Not necessarily limited to but including supernovae. To put it humorous: cleaning out always makes room for new things :-) Maybe if the solar system was closer to the galaxy's core there'd be no life (too hard radiation), if it was out in the halo it got stuck at the level of microbes (no pressure - no selection - no evolution). Who knows ? :-)

No revision from my side :-) $100 is really tight, i'd go for a used dobson from someone who gave up, together wth 2-3 eyepieces. A dobson is a newtonian mirror on an alt/az-mounting. Newtonian mirrors need some adjusting from time to time (if so equipped), especially when they are carried arounf a lot. alt/az-mounting need constant adjusting of 2 axisses when viewing. There is a lot of information out there over these things. Refractors are easier to handle but for 100,- you only get a hose with a plastic lens. Probably just money thrown out of the window ... Photographic equipment is different, if you want to do it right(tm).

Water from comets hitting a body with only a thin atmosphere and low gravity (like mars) would just boil off and dissipate into space. Water on these bodies can only exist as ice and/or covered by something or encased in minerals to prevent dissipation. Btw., on earth water from comets did (probably) only contribute a small part of the surface water (those tiny little tell tale isotopes you know ... :-)), most of it did and could still come from OH-molecules in minerals. That could(!) imply: you need heavy volcanism over a few hundred million years to create an ocean and plate tectonics to maintain it. Yes, you read right, plate tectonics are an important factor in creating and maintaining our biosphere. It's not like "just add water and oxygen, heat it a while and stir a bit" and voila, the tenants can move in. Getting processes to run in celestial body sizes is, to say the least, impractical and needs energies to create and maintain on a scale that we can only imagine.

To produce a breathable “shirtsleeve“ atmosphere, about 1018 kilograms of O2 must be pumped into the lunar environment. This should require a total energy expenditure of about 1024 joules. Again, both mass and energy figures lie within the budget of an ambitious mature Type I civilization." http://www.xenology.info/Xeno/19.2.1.htm Some scientists would give an arm to have an accepted nature paper. But "Letters to Nature" do not go through the review process like normal papers and do not cover accepted scientific facts or doctrines taught at universities, they can be more in the "what if we" or "how could we" category. Given that 1973 was still under the impression of the Apollo program and nuclear power was kind of a golden calf you'd probably find more suggestions like this. It's a play of thoughts like the Drake-formula (which Vondrak explicitly refers to). So if i read that with some critic thoughts in mind it comes to me that it's a nice try to get space into the public (nature has a broad coverage), the own name out and later on wave with it to a politician to ask for money. ;-)

Huyeeeeh-hua ! (dash)

So, i read that pokemon gamers padded in a minefield in bosnia, others into military installations. In a german city (don't remember which one) it is planned to build red led-strips into the pavement at pedestrian crossings cause people have been badly injured shuffling on the road without even looking up. And it's true, when i go into town here everyone is looking at the "smartphone", couples walking side by side, 5 year old girls and boys. It's a ghostly sight. Ok, i hear you thinking "Oh, you've noticed" without looking up from the screen. What is so interesting there on these things that people give away their health ? Edit: errr, just saw that a thread on pokemon already exists, so if mods feel urged to merge no problem for me ...

Ehmm, guys & gals, you are aware that "terraforming" is totally and utterly fiction. I mean, every thought is allowed of course and i have read last century's sf authors as well (liked particularly Stanislaw Lem), but it seems to me that the borders between reality and fantasy sometimes get a little blurry, or am i mistaken ? Really, i mean no offense ... call me a spoilsport ... just sayin' ... everything's allowed ... just go ahead ... don't even ignore me :-)

H And i thought one of them got out to take a photo for later proof ... ;-) Thanks, @The Raging Sandwich, nice thread !

What Biff did: travel to the future, get stock quotes/football results travel back and bet my money accordingly. :-)

I'm a little on your side @LordFerret, but climate and weather are two different things. Weather is measured at a single place at a certain time. Climate is something more "political", it's a statistical figure for a certain area over a timespan. While weather for the next few days can be quite reasonably computed provided the model fits and the computherium is big enough climate is modeled on a larger scale and thus a little diffuse, though reasonable enough for big picture. But we have the IPCC, politicians and journalists that browse through scientific publications to predict the future changes from them (no sarcasm !). They look for those tiny changes in glacier dynamics, or atmospheric composition and sell us the implications to the future. Nevertheless predictions are difficult, particularly those regarding the future. I've never been in an abnormal weather-phenomenon until now, but i live in a relatively quiet environment.

I was chewing my fingernails waiting for an update to the Apollo 11 mission :-) Who/what shot the foto of the docked spacecrafts ?

That's a misunderstanding :-). Not the whole gulf is the impact crater. The impact crater is buried under sediments, partly on the peninsula of yucatan, partly on the shelf. http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/images/yucatan.html The crater itself is "just" 200-300km in diameter. http://www.chicxulubcrater.org/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicxulub_crater Edit: Gulf of Mexico is a tectonical structure on a larger time scale: http://www.nature.nps.gov/geology/education/osu/GUIS_1999_GIP_Lillie.pdf

I doubt that chimpanzees have "culture", but culture is a very soft expression and maybe a chimpanzee guy sees that totally different . A fully developed "culture" with art (cave art, stone paintings), adornment on body and clothes, music (flutes from the swabian alb), figurines (swabian alb as well) is usually connected to modern humans from roughly 45.000yrs on. Neandertals seemingly did not develop that diversity, but it is assumed that the latter were very few at that time, while modern humans spread out rather quickly (increasing number of find sites). Nevertheless i am a little fond of the Neandertals (maybe more than others) and thus expanded "culture" a little. When we see an ensemble of stone tools from late neandertal sites (mousterien, chatelperronien, aka late middle palaelothic) and early aurignacian (first modern humans in europe, aka early upper palaeolithic) it's usually quite clear to distinguish the one from the other. Though they lived side by side over a long period of time they left different "finger prints". Late find sites can suggest that neandertals were just beginning to start a "cultural" development, influenced by contact with modern humans. Why should it be a nightmare to meet an erectus (i lump them together, there are different forms) ? An erectus still had to duck and cover when a cave bear or lion was out hunting. My speculation is: we would probably not be able to communicate fluently but he/she would be able to learn basic things rather quickly, maybe including a complex language if physiology permits (i don't know). About "australos" and "pithecos": I'm 10 years behind now, that never had my interest as much as the ice age, but i think the basic classification hasn't changed much. "Lucy" is the most complete individual that exists from before 2.6my. But i fear the habit you discribe hasn't changed. If you're interested, a lot has been written and published ... :-)

A few weeks ago i read a text about a trinary star system, a binary couple very close to each other, like a few AE and a third one very far away (many hundrets AE) that seemed to be stable. In that case the couple might be assumed to have a single COM in respect to the far away star. Whether this is usable for smaller units with planet/moon sizes and distances, i don't know. Sun and Jupiter would probably disturb in our case. Another thing that comes to my mind: tidal forces brake the rotation due to friction, thus over time forcing the body with less mass into a lock (the bigger one will lock as well but much slower). The moon drifts slowly away from the earth, it startet much closer (well, on the surface :-)), i recall this is because of impulse preservation while braking the earths rotation over time. How would that effect influence a binary moon-system close to a planet ? Would the larger component drift away slower cause it brakes slower, thus loosing the smaller component which might be "flung out" rather quickly that way ? (see for example: http://sservi.nasa.gov/?question=moon-drifting-from-the-earth) Just playing with ideas ...

I found it fascinating how McNeice interpreted Baron Harkonnen. I just thought that Red Baron is worn-out, so i made it green.

I'm sorry, but it's 2:1for the moon :-) http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/kits/tides/tides06_variations.html But i have no idea what would happen if there were to bodies ... weather services probably had one more excuse if things wouldn't happen as predicted ...

So we're almost collegues :-) I studied prehistory and as sidesubjects palaeo-anthropology and palaeontology in the late 2000s, just for fun, i don't work in the field. Must admit that it's difficult to keep up-to-date since away from the resources of the university. Just bought a new bookshelf ... Yep, that wonders. There is/was a tendency to open up new species on the base of a single bone- or toothfragment, especially in forms pre-dating homo erectus. And not much was gained about the early forms since then. "Lucy" being probably the most important. The "Hobbits" have been newly datet and like some may have suspected are now much older than initially proclaimed :-) With Homo erectus it seems that finds become more numerous and things clearer. Am thinking of Atapuerca, Dmanisi, Tautavel ... and with the appearance of early modern humans in Africa and neandertals in Europe, that had a greater impact in the record, things are getting even better. Since the last warm-phase (OIS-5) finds are numerous enough to start a cultural/specieswise classification based on the make and form of stone- and later-on bonetools, so for homo sapiens and subspecies neandertal these assessments have been made, for earlier forms including Homo erectus not.

You can do so in a lifetime. Our behavior is not totally controlled by genes, it's also and much more dependent on cultur and tradition. It is not "built in" to kill each other, in fact most humans (i know) are pretty peaceful. You're judging from your perspective, and that is filled with terrible pictures, wars and since two decades intense terrorism, but it's money (resources), ideology and strive for power that produces these things (aka culture), it's not built into human beings by default. I tell you, that was not always the case, and this is the link to human origins :-) !! Speculation (there are only a few archaeological hints in cave-art) !!: Just try to imagine a different ideology, shamanism, that teaches a spirit in everything and a link between everything. Couldn't that be a ground for peaceful coexistence ? I am not preaching here, hope you get me right ;-) Peace, brother :-)