WestAir

Ever thrown a paper airplane? When the nose hits the wall it gets all crinkled. But if you fold it so the nose is flat, it takes impacts with no damage every time!

Assuming this is alien, why is everyone assuming it's the remnants of dead aliens? How do you even destroy a DS with a RKKV?

I just want to hear someone use the phrase Winter is coming. It would make WW3 worth it.

Albert, I know I have the power of google at my fingertips, but do you have a source for this? I'd be extremely interested to read up on some of the history between the UN and Antarctica.

Gasoline. It lets the ego-blimp in the Ford F-150 next to me plow down the freeway at 90 mph with no regard to the harsh realities of Fnet=m(a).

An entire submarine, though? Given the direction modern naval combat is progressing, I wonder if the endeavor is even worth the effort?

I operate rear engine jets, (MD 80s) and the first thing that would happen besides me having my monthly bid awarded schedule pulled without pay is a long phone call with the chief pilot about why I threw a plane into reverse instead of using the brakes that are there. After that I'll probably end up working in South Africa flying Caravans. Edit: According to google, a lot of Citations and even MD-80's use idle reverse as speed control. I've never heard about this practice before. Thanks for teaching me something new!

Your question makes me wonder if a Universe with an infinite supergalactic structure is capable of dying to heat death.

I don't think anyone can (ever) answer your question. The final, ultimate macroscale body of the universe is an unknown.

And that friction is ridiculously low too. Once you give it breakaway thrust you can idle at about 20 knots for probably your whole (straight) taxi without touching the levers at all. (In my experience, anyways. Never had the opportunity to try and idle taxi a 747 at MTOW, but I digress.) As an aside to the OP, I agree with the others that this question is nonsensical. Reality is not a cartoon, and as K^2 has said conveyors are not magic. (Though if you manage to invent one, please tell me how before you go public. I'd love to get an award for inventing observable magic.)

Book may have been better suited for Venus, ironically.

I disagree. I say that's what makes us special. To quote Dr.Who: Humanity is all that has meaning in a Universe that is meaningless.

You asked "what's the point of our existence" if we are doomed to die off in 10,000 years. I ask you a counter question: What's the difference between us lasting 10,000 compared to 10 billion? I think the answer to your question of what's the point has the same exact answer for both, and that's why I suggest we shoot for the later and try to make it 10 billion years.

I feel this quote surmises the human mindset of life and death, because it assumes humanity isn't already doomed. Remember: Nothing lasts forever. Humans are all going to die -- the Earth is going to be destroyed -- the Galaxy will whither away and become indistinguishable from the background radiation of the observable. These are all facts. The fact that our society treats everything like it will last forever has swayed many to feeling like our species is immortal. You don't need to go far to hear someone say never, always or forever. (Be it a discussion on political policy, what happens to plastics in the ocean, or anything. We subconsciously assume our problems are the most important problems that ever have been or ever will be - and that's a very long time) My point is this: By delaying our demise (which will happen, mind you), we give 10,000 years worth of generations the chance to experience life. That's a gift, not a curse. It's no different from taking medicine to lower cholesterol because you want to delay your heart attack from happening now or in 10 years. Life is fun, why end it sooner than it needs to end?

I think the largest risk to your health on an airplane is the person sitting next to you. I've seen people take off their socks and shoes and rest their feet on the headrest in front of them. I've seen people vigorously picking their nose like they have a thousand year itch. I once spent the night at an outstation because a passenger projectile vomited mid flight causing 3 other passengers to vomit after them and a crew member to get so nauseous he stayed in the lav the rest of the flight. Being in public is a health hazard because people are disgusting, not because modern machinery is dangerous. The article should be titled "Reasons why it's unsanitary to be near people" - maybe then it would be believable.

I may or may not have read the OP.

Oh I see what you're saying. Now I understand why we're not seeing eye to eye. To answer your question I would be fine if it were guaranteed that my consciousness would go to my newly made clone. Unfortunately, from how I understand the transporter scenario, consciousness is not preserved. The clone gets a new one but is not a continuation of your consciousness. As I understand it, transporters copy you, kill you, then a perfect copy that's not you takes over. That's why I would be hesitant to do it because I wouldn't want to permanently die.

It's just that most people have a sense of self preservation and wouldn't want to be killed pointlessly. You're rationalizing your death so from that perspective your sacrifice makes complete sense, however most of us would be hesitant to die in this manner.

The point is that unlike in the car crash, you would actually die. You understand that, right? You're not going to wake up in a new body, you're going to die.

I don't see the correlation with your argument. I can easily conceptualize myself (or all life) having never existed. What I can't conceptualize is existence not existing. I feel like there should be something, even if that something is one quanta of information smaller than the Planck scale with time-space nonexistent. I can conceptualize that. I cannot conceptualize the absence of information and space-time. Even if I could, my point was that such a dramatized universe doesn't "feel" natural. I realize this is just my opinion.

Don't neutron stars rotate faster than once per 5 seconds? I thought it was on the order of several hundred times per second.

Let me ask a counter question... Would it seem right if nothing existed? If "the universe" was a zero dimensional, timeless "lack of somethingness" with 0 energy/mass/information. Somehow that just doesn't "feel" right. Like there should be something, even if that something is drastically different from the observable we see.

Baggers, You've correctly stated that consciousness is a lie to the system by the system. Unfortunately for anyone willing to digitize themselves, once the illusion is brought to an end, you still die when your biological self is killed. Consciousness will quantize down to the digital copy, but your copy will cut to black because the cells that you are that is being lied to about its total consciousness will die, and the biological you won't be a part of that new consciousness. The good news about this transfer is that because you'd be dead, you'd never know you didn't make it to the digital world. Neither will the new you or an outside observer. Congratulations on your successful unsuccessful journey. (The entire topic is almost directly akin to the teleporter debate.)

The hyper-intelligent AI leading the Ceres Belt Defense Force runs through trillions of different scenarios - looking through every action/response/contingency physically possible to try and find the most effective method to achieve victory. After several seconds of computing every possible response, it concludes there's nothing the Ceres Belt colonies can do to triumph over the industrial super-giant that is the Jovian Empire. Relaying this to the local politicians, a decision is made to concede defeat and be capitulated. Ten years later, after getting its act together, Earth, Mars and Luna use their overwhelming influence to undo the capitulation and slaps some sense back into Jupiter. The end.