hunter558

Id like to change my answer to buying all the poor nations in the world, buying 1st world military tech from the US, Europe, and Asia, and then build a giant war machine out of the poor people dividing them up into an industrial, agricultural, and military sector to feed the war effort, and then conquer the world. I\'d still have trillions left over to invest in my new global nation and i wouldn\'t be a harsh ruler, it\'d be for the greater good.

I don\'t think this is possible, the distances are far too vast and by the time you got another rocket out there to attempt an intercept, the other piece would be far gone. There\'s almost no way you could calculate a perfect intercept trajectory on the first pass and would likely orbit Kerbol for hours(at 10k warp) until you even got close, let alone intercept it.

I believe its negative mass actually because photons are zero mass(or extremely close to it) and therefore travel at the speed of light, a negative mass object could be propelled at even faster speeds. Negative Energy is more along the lines of anti-matter which does indeed collapse and i never read Alcubierre\'s paper but would indeed like to, i just know of his theories. You speak in such finiteness however that its almost unscientific of you, many scientists say they would love to believe in god if there was any proof he/she or it existed for example. Very few things in science are fact, all simply theories no matter how much proof is for or against them, anything is possible.

you wouldn\'t be able to buy out the US, because technically if you had 25 trillion dollars, you would have inflated our debt to amounts far more than 25 trillion. The debt crisis will never be solved by throwing more money at it. And if i had 25 trillion i would invest in space projects, the key to continually benefiting society!

In order to travel at the speed of light in normal space you need to have negative mass which is unknown to be possible. But the key to science is that there are numerous unknowns, just because we haven\'t proven Einstein wrong doesn\'t mean we never will. There are also theories such as the Alcubierre Drive(look it up) which would create a warp bubble and move space around the object in the bubble. This doesn\'t violate Einstein\'s laws but would still take an innumerable amount of energy to accomplish, and we dont know how to make warp bubbles either. It seems very bleak that FTL or even light-speed will ever be accomplished but there is so little we know, never give up hope.

Actually getting to the moon and colonizing it is much easier than it was 30 years ago, it still isnt easy but the space programs of the world have evolved significantly since then, especially NASA. Getting to Mars would be more challenging but much easier than 30 years ago. The comparison to America is ridiculous but a Mars colonization wouldn\'t be as bad as you make it out to be. First of all, the point of the project is to continuously grow the colony overtime so there wouldn\'t only be 2-3 people there forever. Secondly there is water on Mars, most of it sealed up in the poles, this would also be one of the most scientifically valuable places to be so they would likely land there. Therefore i doubt they would be drinking their own piss for the rest of their lives. The first colonists wouldn\'t have much to look for but if the colony were to grow many times that size for decades or centuries to come, i believe it will likely be a fairly habitable place to live.

I challenge somebody here to make an exact scale model of the Sabre from Halo Reach and get it into space using the launch pad only, and only using stock parts. It has to at least reach sub-orbit but it would be cooler if it reached orbit. It does not have to have 7 stages like the actual Sabre but the more exact to specifications the better. If you dont know what the Sabre is, look it up to get an idea and share your results if you manage to make one.

The point of living on mars is that there are tons of valuable heavy metals there, its also for the value of science, curiosity of humans is our single best asset, its what made everything that we take for granted today. It wasn\'t always considered valuable or useful knowledge but much of what we know today is vital to modern human survival. While i do agree with colonizing mars, you\'d think it\'d be easier to send people for several months or years at a time and then retrieve them, switching them out with fresh recruits, using the same vehicle they used to get there. Slowly but surely you build up the size of the colony so you can send more people there, and less people need to be brought back because its larger and more habitable. Just my 2 cents

Hey guys, just joined the forum and just started playing the game a couple of days ago but i had a problem and wasnt sure where to put this. I want the developers to take note of the issues that occur when landing on Kerbin or its moons. You cant really tell how far it is to the bottom, i ended up crash landing on Mun and Minmus with the meter still reading several thousand meters. If there was a way we could gauge altitude and maybe a more developed world map with topography and exact altitudes that would be awesome. Its really hard and really annoying when you\'re so close to a successful landing and have no idea where the bottom is, especially on the dark side of the planetary bodies. Anyway, just throwing it up there, love the game, keep it up!