Kerbart

Getting into orbit is easy. Take a container of oxidizer, a container of fuel, run them through a turbo pump, mix & ignite, and point your rocket up and then gradually to the horizon as it gains altitude. Given that it's conceptually so easy really makes me wonder why not every country has a space station. What? Execution is hard? Ooooh. So what does it really mean that this company has a "proof of concept" and can "transmit power through a microwave beam in a laboratory?" It probably means they need money from inventors. Unless they're beaming 50MW from one mountain top to another 20 kilometers away, I'm not impressed. Yes, they have a concept. I can build a bottle rocket. Does that mean I'm running a spaceprogram, because I showed that conceptually my rockets work? Execution is the incredible, incredible hard part and they haven't showed anything close to it. I'll be impressed if they get it to work but I suspect that, after securing millions from their investors, this is the last we'll hear from them.

Of course over time these components *would* be available. So maybe, instead of exluding part x for part y, why not make certain parts only available after a while? They'd be in some kind of "tech" tree, that you'd then have to unlock over time with points, earned, for instance, with science. Now that might be an elegant solution for these kind of restrictions!

A tiny bug which hopefully can easily be reproduced: I have two kRPC buttons.

Once you have the octoprobe core you don't need a twin capsule, but it'd be nice to have one. There are several modded capsules out there and that's great, but one should be able to play the game with stock without the feeling that something is missing and that's the case right now. In a game where you have to launch manned because the technology is not unlocked until you get past half the tech tree it just seems wrong to send an unmanned Mk I capsule (with probecore) on rescue missionsâ€â€it just feels like you'd need a pilot for the maneuvering required. The Mk III is complete overkill, not to mention that it blows your budget in career out of the water. I agree with others that Soviet style capsules would be awesome. They have a much more Kerbal feeling to them to begin with.

Let's entertain the idea for a second. And let's for simplicity sake there's no air resistance because that would totally break our model. So, our rocket dives to sea level, gaining, for arguments sake, a velocity of mach 3. And now we're using THAT to try to get into orbit. I'm pretty sure that once you point your rocket upward (again assuming no losses that would happen in real life) you will lose speed due to gravity, and at an altitude of 16km be back at speed 0. Unless I'm missing something.

If it makes you feel better, a friend of mine lives in a mining "town" in Nevada. Population 500. The nearest "town" with a convenience store is about 45 minutes (by car) away. Going to Walmart (let alone specialty stores with a selection) is a five hour (round) trip. As for dealing with the nothingness -- pick up a hobby that aligns with it, photography for instance. Regarding transportation: while generalizing is bad and applying it to you is probably unfair, motorcycles are very vulnerable in traffic and require the rider to be extremely aware, cautious, experienced and restrained; something young drivers in general lack in considerable amounts. Yes, here in the US the legal driving age is 16 or 17 (depending on the state) and getting your license here in New Jersey requires a whopping 6 hours of driving with an instructor, followed by demonstrating on a closed circuit your ability to stay on the right side of the road and stop for stop signs (and yet people manage to fail the test... go figure). Then again the percentage of underage drivers killed in traffic equals that of the total number of underage drives in traffic; although I'm pretty sure that there are some facts hidden in those statistics (number of miles driven, underage drivers can only drive during daytime, etc) that elevate this to "statistically this age group does not do well in traffic to begin with". While you may feel that your parents concern is overly cautious and doesn't do you justice, they also love you and have encountered a lot more [xxx] people who shouldn't be there on the road than you're aware of, and they'd rather see you alive than have proof of their concerns.

The problem with that reasoning is that you assume that the inflow of energy is the only factor in what determines the surface temperature and it's not. The (constant) temperature is a result of an equilibrium between energy received at the surface, and energy released. When your planet "loses" more energy than it receives, it cools off. When it loses less energy it heats up. Don't think the reception part is easy because it's not just thermal energy received from the sun. The inside of the planet may be hot and that might radiate (and convect) outward. A solid core might mean tectonic movement with heat resistance. And not all radiation hitting the planet is converted to heat; some of it simply bounces of ("reflection") and doesn't get the chance to add heat. Conversely, how much heat the planet loses is also not simple. A lot of that depends on if there's an atmosphere or not, and how good that atmosphere can retain thermal energy. Yes... and that's exactly the problem. We're introducing more of this heat retaining gas into the atmosphere. While thermal energy IN doesn't change, we're lowering thermal energy OUT. And that... means temperature will rise.

While I fully agree with you it did surprise me that it seems standard procedure for ISS to rotate the whole thing around for docking purposes. Of course they get to bold the parts together through a rigid frame, as opposed to depending only on wobbly docking ports to put all the parts together.

Actually it shows a lot. The fact that there's MH370 wreckage suggests that there's an MH370 wreck. Reason dictates that there is one, but now we know. While it may not seem a lot, for the family of the victims it brings closure a step forward: from "disappeared without a trace" to "crashed into the ocean" may not seem a lot but for them it does. It also tells us that the plane crashed in the Southern Ocean. Surely not near Madagascar, but we know how the currents in that region work. It pretty much confirms that MH370 has indeed crashed somewhere west of Australia, and not north of Indonesia or in Afghanistan as some conspiracy theorists claim. When you have nothing to work on, you'll need to work on assumptions . When you work on assumptions, any trace of evidence that supports or rejects those assumptions is huge, and this is one of them.

I think that what Dr. Hawking means is, with the current state of technology, we do not have the means to run into other aliens. They will run into us, because it's certainly not up to our technology to search, find and encounter other civilisations. Hence, when there's contact with aliens, we're going to be the primitives and they're going to be explorers who discover us. That's the Carl Sagan angle. For an alien race to be able to reach us, their technology is way more advanced than ours (doh). And their ability to destroy themselves in the process is also way more advanced. So, for an alien race to have the ability to reach other star systems, they must have weeded out aggression a long time ago or they would have destroyed themselves before they were able to reach the stars. Personally I tend to go with Sagan. What would be the point for aliens to go to war with a bunch of primitives? Resources? They can just take it from the outer planets or other solar systems. Earth is not a unique source of resources, I think Slaves? As if you need manual labor when you have the technology to travel between stars. Evil? They'd succumbed to civil war a long time ago The only reason they'd have to destroy us, is as a pre-emptive strike to prevent us from ruling over them, somewhere in the future.

Well doh. Wouldn't you on purpose take a few pieces of the 777 that you landed somewhere and drop them in the ocean to suggest it crashed? Note how pristine that flaperon is! It never crashed! It landed safely and then the flaperon got removed... I'm telling ya...

Exactly. Imagine your astronaut in orbit and he starts puking violently (a potentially life-threatening situation inside a space-suit in a zero-g environment). And then all scientists look at each other sheepishly.. “Oooh yeah, we didn't test that.â€Â

I admire your optimism but the state in which 1.0 was released does not do justice to your beliefs.

Keyword legal. Their corporate sharks attorneys will be very quick to point out that it's likely outside the jurisdiction of the court. Large corporations are practically immune to legislation and don't pay any taxes when they are in the US, let alone if they're outside the earth.

Replace "minerals" with "whales" and "space" with "the ocean" and you can see exactly what will happen: There's no law or treaty that will stop you If there is a law or treaty you can safely ignore it If there is an outcry over said law or treaty you can claim it's for "scientific purposes" If there is an outcry over "scientific missions" you can safely ignore it (the “Yeah? So stop me†approach If someone decides to do something about your "scientific missions" you can, depending on how effective those protest missions are, resort to violence. Heck, even call in the navy of your home country  all it takes is just a sufficient bribe contribution to the election campaigns of some key officials So basically, yes, if your technology allows you to capture an asteroid and mine it, you can do it. You're literally in lawless territory. If a competitor sends in a small unmanned probeâ€â€or a bigger manned vesselâ€â€it might mysteriously "malfunction". Unless there's going a to some form of law enforcement, outer space will be wilder than the wild west.

There, I fixed it for you

Rare earth mining (most of those metals seem to be coming from meteorites, so why not go to the source) Biological research (without fear of dooming earth when a vicious microbe escapes) for pharmaceutical companies Off-shore banking. Why hope countries like Luxembourg or Switzerland change their banking rules and disclose your account information to foreign governments? Bank in a zone that is under no jurisdiction! This may be a far fetch but I'm looking for industries that have a lot of money for starters. Data Storage. Park your data in orbit! Safe against earthquakes, tsunami's, tornadoes, avalanches and terrorist attacks! (If Monster can sell audio cables for $100 then we should be able to sell this to the market!)

The one we haven't seen in action yet? That one?

Yeah but dude's not getting anywhere until he adapts the MOAR STRUTS attitude.

Ehm, yeah, isn't that what the video series is telling us?

Are you aware of the number of biomes? Think of all the science they can pick up!

Conspiracy theorists will claim there was an alien spacebase visible that our illuminati overlords demanded to be shopped out, lest we'd find out about who put them in power.

Well if you're going to kick off WW3 then adhering to territorial limits is a bit silly, isn't it. Launch right off the coast, I'd say.

Exactly! The possibilities are endless! Adjust the 99% of society to be genetically inclined to like servitude and a simple lifestyle, and 1% to be hyperintelligent and stay on top. They'll be served by people who are happy to live in poverty and work their behinds of for the elite. Everyone wins!

But that's only a fraction of the hemisphere and not the most exciting part either; about 20% of the area seems to be a featureless dust plateau. Why did they decide to only photograph those? not enough time for the entire planet face?