N_las

Talking about Messier Objects, I took this image of M16 last friday: http://i.imgur.com/op7z9DZ.jpg It contains the quite famous "Pillars of creation". Image from Hubble: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/68/Pillars_of_creation_2014_HST_WFC3-UVIS_full-res_denoised.jpg Sadly my picture is nowhere near this quality, I guess I just lack a few billion $...

I life in a big city, and with binoculars I can just make out M31. If you are able to see the bright band of the galaxy with the nacked eye, you should be able to see M31 with about any pair of binoculars there is. How big is its aperture? You seem to expect "something definitive to resolve into an object". That is not how messier objects will look through binoculars or small telescopes. M31 looks mostly just like a cloud made of dim light (you only see its very bright center).

Humorous take on this topic: http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=3732

I made this picture in southern Germany: http://i.imgur.com/s7jvJMJ.png

That would be so useles... The claim that the powder is less heavy than the equivalent liquid alcohol is just nonsense. So instead of buying 50 Liter alcohol fuel at the gas station, you buy at lest the same amount of weight in form of powder. Imagine having big sacks of powder to fill into your car, instead of a simple liquid. And you to add water, you have to mix the fuel yourself in your car. No thanks.

What is that powdered alkohol for? Can't you use just a little bottle of wodka to put into your drinks? Isn't that just a scam? Edit: On wikipedia it says that powder can hold 60% of its own weight in alcohol. So If you have a 1 kg (!) of that stuff, you have 375g of alkohol. That is less than you have in 1 liter of wodka. And 1 kg of that stuff sounds like an insane amount. You sure don't save any transport weight by using it. How much does it cost? Edit: Yes, it clearly is a scam. They market it as if it would be more portable. People jump to the conclusion it would be like concentrated alcohol in powdered form, and they just need to take a small package of powder instead of a big bottle. They say a "liquid is often not convinient" and that powder would safe space and weight..... Clearly it is not. You don't save space and you don't save weight.

I think the video RuBisCo posted is from years ago and does not represent the current tests.

I am pretty sure there are many lobsters who aged one year during the last year.

If the heating effect of cellphone radiation would be any factor, then a hot summer day or a fever or a simple hot beverage would be much more devestating.

I fixed that sentence for you. It was an analogy. You can't escape the natrual background radiation and other natrual sources of cancer. So the road is the only option. If cellphones would increase cancer risk, we would see an increase in cancer cases over the last 20 years (age corrected). We don't. Also, I propose that bouncing castles cause cancer. You disagree, they don't cause cancer? Why? "Because you said so? How do you know that?" (Quote from you) As long as science have no idea how to create life starting with just bunch of atoms, we can't say for sure what kind of castle can harm life and what won't. One more thing... how science checked bouncing castles? Did they put bouncing castle near living cell and were waiting for 10 or 20 years to see what will happen?

Maybe there newer measurements are a hundred times more accurate? I think the claimed 0.1 N per 1 kW was the number reported by the chinese team.

Yes, I want to go by that logic, and I agree more or less with everything you said. Of course all those risks (regarding severity or frequency) pale in comparison to the risk of a car crash on the way to and from the airport.

That would be not important, because it would be indistinguishable from natural cancer occurences. The "noise" of people getting cancer randomly at that level is greater than the "signal" of cancer caused by that radiation. It is like a slippery road. The slippines does increase your risk of losing balance and falling. If you decrease the slippiness slowly, the amount of people that lose balance will also decrease. At a certain level you will see that the randomness of people losing balance (on all sorts of roads, even non-slippy ones) is greater than the few people that actually fall because of the slippiness. At that point it becomes irrational to fear the road. Using a phone and being in range of its radiation does not increase cancer risk.

You really should provide more context to that. Maybe he just doesn't know what he is talking about and he meant something like this:

easiest would be to calculate x,y,z,vx,vy,vz out of the current Orbit O. Then calculate delta_vx,delta_vy,delta_vz out of your manuever N Then just add the delta_v values to the v values. Then calculate the new orbit O_new out of x,y,z,vx_new,vy_new,vz_new