Bill Phil

It’s only going to get worse from here. That’s the way the world is, I’m afraid.

Takumi’s AE86

There really isn't always plenty to say. I mean, what do you expect people to do? Talk about the weather? Sure they can do that. But that's just talking to talk. And of course they all have access to weather forecasts in their pockets. Maybe talk about general happenings? Well sure they can do that, but they likely keep each other up to speed through their phones as it is with no physical contact necessary. Sometimes I'll go to dinner with family. Thing is, we already spend a lot of time together. We've already said everything that could be said in this situation. I appreciate spending time with my family, but there just isn't a thing to say that either hasn't already been said or could be said later. Even when I make a concerted effort to not be on my phone no one really talks at all. Not much at any rate. Not to mention how important phones have become in modern life. You can file your taxes, set up appointments, buy things, catch up on reading, check grades, send emails, talk to friends who aren't sitting next to you... The way people communicate is changing. But that doesn't imply the previous way was really any better. It's a simple question for most folks: would you rather have a conversation that's likely to be meaningless or take part in the world at large? There's more on phones than social media. And even just taking into account social media, that's where a large portion of modern social life happens. Imagine if all your friends could be contacted with just the push of a button. One of my friends recently had a relative pass away and I wasn't aware precisely because I don't use social media. But a good number of my other friends do use social media and found out. That's the kind of thing I'd like to know as quickly as possible. Checking my phone is a key part of that. Like it or not a significant portion of modern life is on the internet. Phones are a critical access point for the internet. More can be said using a phone than by talking with the people sitting next to you. We can basically participate socially at all times. We don't have to actually be near someone to talk to them. So the reasoning goes like this: why limit the social interactions I can have just because I'm with people? In comparison it's hard to find things to actually talk about. Indeed, topics of conversation can originate from the participants' phones. News. Videos. Jokes. All kinds of things. But what's funny is that very similar complaints where made over 100 years ago when books and newspapers started to become huge parts of society...

If everyone is looking at their phones then there’s a good chance there isn’t anything to say. My friends and I generally don’t keep our eyes on our screens. We get enough entertainment from talking to each other. But there are times where my eyes are on my phone screen. And generally it’s because there isn’t a darn thing to discuss. ‘Course I can’t speak for everyone.

So here's one that's good. An older version got copyright struck (not for the music, but the picture used as the background). Pretty good. Just can't understand most of it. But there is an English version. Not a direct translation but they managed to keep the meaning fairly intact, from what I hear. I really like the background music. Sounds great.

Up-Goer #

I think Jeff Bezo's rationale (or at least what it was some time ago) made a lot more sense. If our energy use continues to grow then eventually we may have to cover the entire planet in solar panels. If we get fusion power or use advanced fission or space power satellites, you still get the problem of our civilization's waste heat rivalling the energy the planet gets from the Sun. For now it doesn't, but if our energy consumption continues to grow it will eventually. And if our energy consumption continues to grow even further we'll have to leave the planet just to keep ourselves from being uncomfortable due to our own waste heat. Or we'll have to devise a method of radiating away that waste heat more efficiently, which will likely involve large amounts of space infrastructure to increase the radiating surface (maybe using orbital rings somehow, if that technology is ever developed). Essentially, if our civilization keeps growing (not necessarily population but other factors) then we may outgrow Earth. Of course that's centuries away at the least. There's no rush to colonize space or build that massive infrastructure.

Probably not. I’m pretty sure we’ve thoroughly investigated with radio and it won’t be too long until we can detect waste heat from planetary civilizations (maybe a few decades). If there is life it probably isn’t technologically advanced. We’ll have to wait until we can do better spectroscopy on the atmosphere - among other things - to determine habitability. Still. That’s pretty close, and a yellow star to boot. Probably a good target for interstellar missions, whenever those happen.

“…and the sky was full of stars, and every star was an exploding ship — one of ours.”

8/10 What's frontinco?

Some people might have thought so, yes. But a well-read or well educated person could easily see that these are evolutions of already existing technologies. We could record with the written word, it was logical to think that it was possible to record sounds. The electric telegraph and semaphores already existed. True you couldn't speak through them, but as they developed there's a good chance somewhat thought about transmitting sounds. The first fax machine was arguably made in the 1840s. May not have been a great one, but it could reproduce images over a distance. I would be shocked if no one thought of reproducing sounds.

Finished watching Steins;Gate today. It's... an experience. Starts out funny. Gets serious and funny. Then kind of goes all out funny in a few scenes in the last episode with some seriousness mixed in. Maybe I should become a mad scientist? Or would a mad engineer be more appropriate?

Well it reduces the size of the necessary vehicle, or conversely increases the capability of the mission given a specific launch vehicle. For example, if an Apollo mission used two Saturn V launches the lander could've been quite larger. Or perhaps the second launch carries a single stage lander while the first launch carries the crewed CSM and the LM for the crew to land and return to LLO. In such an architecture the crew could spend far more time on the surface and potentially do more science and experiments. Shuttle-C wouldn't have been able to do what Saturn V did in one launch. It wouldn't be able to launch as much mass to TLI. Indeed, neither can SLS, it's not as powerful as the Saturn V.

What if we got rid of the Van Allen belts...?

Hmm... Calcuting sine and cosine. Rocket spreadsheets. Giving estimates for total mass and all that. Random number generators.

Well it was the Delta III, so... Common bulkheads are useful, yes, but they offer challenges. Separating the propellant tanks slightly hurts performance but is not a show stopper and likely allows quicker development.

You don’t need to calculate. I’ve found that 2000 m/s is a good estimate for the delta-v, plus about 250 for plane change corrections. So long as you leave when the angular separation between Kerbin and Jool is roughly 90 degrees, with Jool ahead of Kerbin, you should be fine. Make sure to leave Kerbin prograde relative to its orbit. Don’t be afraid to make some mid-course corrections, you’ll need them.

Been fooling around in GMAT. Currently trying to model a low thrust transfer from LEO to LLO, with mixed success. At least I got to the point where the Moon shows up...

I'm one of those guys who wears shorts and T-shirts in freezing weather. Most of my time is spent inside (especially during Winter...) so it's not a big deal. Of course, if I'm going to be outside for extended periods of time, I'm getting some thicker clothes.

Well we are all equal after death...

KSP is doing mostly fine. Not much has really changed, save the soup-o-sphere and nuclear engines using just liquidfuel and I think the engine nerf. The core gameplay is the same. You can even play sandbox without heating and commnet...

Just like my dad says. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIZ Might be relevat?

Norminal?

I wouldn’t say it’s not related at all. Learning in a school setting is a series of social interactions and having trouble with social interactions can lead to learning abnormalities. Even so the relationship isn’t a strong one, and many people are able to overcome the issues they faced.

Yeah. The social problems brought on by aspergers and the like can also lead to troubles in learning, or perhaps not. Depends. It’s difficult to generalize since it’s not the same for everone. Teacher quality is certainly important. But that would be the case regardless of whether or not the student has that type of mental condition. I was diagnosed with Asperger’s and I still have trouble with a lot of social interaction. But I’ve also learned to deal with it in most cases. Probably has nothing to do with my math skills or my (apparently) good public speaking skills. Those had to be developed and cultivated, like all skills.