Why is everyone here such a pessmist?

[m4v]

Oh thanks, call me an idiot. Nice.

I didn't. Ignorant and idiot are not the same thing.

Yes, i know it is experimental, But the point is It is a Fusion reactor, experimental or not, its still one.

Nor am i actually being Optimistic really, they may be building it, but Heck, until they try it, I dont actually think its gonna work.

That is experimental isn't a detail you can gloss over, ITER is just a big expensive experiment for try to figure out how to built a *practical* fusion reactor. Because we still have no clue about how we're supposed to put the Sun in a box, and after ITER is done we are going to know more, but we still aren't going to be capable of building a practical reactor.

Meanwhile there's other more practical technologies such as renewables that could really use the funding that ITER is getting.

[Krosulhah]

I didn't. Ignorant and idiot are not the same thing.

That is experimental isn't a detail you can gloss over, ITER is just a big expensive experiment for try to figure out how to built a *practical* fusion reactor. Because we still have no clue about how we're supposed to put the Sun in a box, and after ITER is done we are going to know more, but we still aren't going to be capable of building a practical reactor.

Meanwhile there's other more practical technologies such as renewables that could really use the funding that ITER is getting.

Ignorant: lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated or unsophisticated. I have definitely Got a fairly good education.

Anywho, back to the subject, To be perfectly Honest i didn't check ITER too thoroughly, i grabbed it just to make a point, Sorry, if that was the point you were getting out, i thought you were trying to say that the thing in France wasn't going to happen, Sorry for that confusion, I was merely pointing out some points, and it seemed as if you were simply attacking the fact that France is *trying* to build one.

Also, we should probably drop this, it is way off topic and i dont want to end up in some heavy argument.

Edited November 6, 2013 by Krosulhah

[AmpsterMan]

Yeah steam planes impossible.

Well... I just... my argument... well...

Pooey.

I knew the moment I mentioned it someone would prove me wrong. Thank you for educating me on that, never even thought it would be possible especially seeing that the power-to-weight ratio wouldn't be high enough. If anything this shows just because one is skeptical doesn't mean he is wiser or smarter.

Edited November 6, 2013 by AmpsterMan

[shoveycat]

I believe this thread call for, a special song

[Krevsin]

Fun fact about interstellar travel:

NOBODY IS SAYING IT IS IMPOSSIBLE.

It's not impossible. It just takest a long time due to the distances involved. Instantaneous interstellar travel, you say? Eh, it is possible, but we don't really know enough for anyone to make an entirely valid claim yet, so it's all fringe science for now.

Right now, the only method of interstellar travel we know is definetly possible is the slow one, which takes tens if not hundreds of years at relativistic speeds to get anywhere. It's not impossible, it's just highly impractical.

Not to mention, why on earth do you want interstellar travel anyway? Do you not think that he solar system, with its abundance of moons and planets is enough to house the entirety of humanity for the next thousand years or so? Maybe, just maybe, people should be focusing more on the obstacles based on getting to said planets.

Face it, Mars, Venus or any other planet/moon aren't 20 square feet of your neighbour's back yard, they are entire planets' worth of surface to explore and (hopefully) colonize. They will provide enough challenges and opportunities for exploration for quite a while, a couple of centuries, if I'm conservative in my estimates.

The solar system is, for right now, big enough and wasting time on theories on interstellar travel and ways they could 'possibly' do it in the next few centuries is akin to a homeless man looking for a palace to buy. It's good to have ambition, but asessing your situation and acting accordingly is even more important, for crying out loud.

[Kinglet]

Most of people at science labs really believe that humanity is doomed to extinction, or will advance slowly.

One even said we'll send our first ship to Alpha Centauri in 3000

Tell me, what is this?

If you want mankind to advance, don't resign yourself to fate! Do something! (i.e Volunteering for the Mars Society, writing letters to Congressmen, running for Congress, preaching benifits of space exploration to friends, .etc.etc).

Seriously, you have to be hopeful and optimistic, instead of going around saying everything is impossible.

Because funding.

[NASAFanboy]

Because funding.

I'm starting to get hopeful for the SLS.

It has massive political allies, many of whom are the major presidental candidates for 2014, and many of whom are still in Congress.

They are, in fact, funding PAST the level that was originally asked for, adding several million to the budget, and possibly even launching the first prototype in 2016

Edited November 6, 2013 by NASAFanboy

[Krevsin]

I'm starting to get hopeful for the SLS.

It has massive political allies, many of whom are the major presidental candidates for 2014, and many of whom are still in Congress.

They are, in fact, funding PAST the level that was originally asked for, adding several million to the budget.

Or, you know, they could just adapt the Falcon Heavy to fit an Orion and use that. Because Falcon Heavy is much nearer to being launched and has less testing time to undergo. Not to mention, it'd be cheaper (in the short run, which is pretty much the only run politicians can think in) to just buy a couple of Falcon Heavies off SpaceX.

Not that I'd want to see that, but I fear that may actually happen. Because politics are strange.

[SFJackBauer]

I'll just leave some quotes here...

Man won't fly for a thousand years.

- Wilbur Wright, to brother Orville after a disappointing flying experiment (1901)

In all fairness to those who by training are not prepared to evaluate the fundamental difficulties of going from one planet to another, or even from the earth to the moon, it must be stated that there is not the slightest possibility of such journeys.

-F.R. Moulton, American astronomer (1935)

Aerial flight is one of that class of problems with which man will never be able to cope.

- Simon Newcomb, American astronomer (1903)

Radio has no future. Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible. X-rays will prove to be a hoax.

- William Thomson, Lord Kelvin, British scientist (1899)

There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will.

- Albert Einstein (1932)

[drakesdoom]

I'll just leave some quotes here...

Man won't fly for a thousand years.

- Wilbur Wright, to brother Orville after a disappointing flying experiment (1901)

In all fairness to those who by training are not prepared to evaluate the fundamental difficulties of going from one planet to another, or even from the earth to the moon, it must be stated that there is not the slightest possibility of such journeys.

-F.R. Moulton, American astronomer (1935)

Aerial flight is one of that class of problems with which man will never be able to cope.

- Simon Newcomb, American astronomer (1903)

Radio has no future. Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible. X-rays will prove to be a hoax.

- William Thomson, Lord Kelvin, British scientist (1899)

There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will.

- Albert Einstein (1932)

The brightest among us often underestimate the ability of an idiot that won't give up.

[ZedNova]

The brightest among us often underestimate the ability of an idiot that won't give up.

This. Mind if i use this for my sig?

[drakesdoom]

this. Mind if i use this for my sig?

i am [FLUFFY BUNNIES]ing famous!

Can't even caps lock on here wtf?

[Holo]

Very rapid technological progress has only really started with transistors 60 years ago. Humanity still hasn't grew out of the mindset that next generation will be the same as this one.

[Seret]

i dont see a whole lot of pessimism so much as people in the know shooting down the ideas of the layman.

This.

Pessimism comes with age, some can argue it's wisdom.

And this.

I work in engineering. When a roomful of engineers are presented with a new idea the first thing you'll get is 50 reasons why it won't work. This can be discouraging, but with a little shift in perspective you can see it's a gift.

People with a practical mind will think analytically about any new information. The fact that they immediately point out the possible issues and snags is a good thing, it helps to explore the problem space. Every choice has pros and cons, and in my experience rooms where there are too many enthusiastic optimists (eg: most people in marketing or sales) tend to make bad decisions because they rush in without evaluating things properly. Contrariwise, rooms full of overly analytical types (eg: engineers) can often lack enthusiasm for change. That's where leadership comes in, good leaders of science and engineering people are able to take on board the avalanche of scepticism, and channel it into productive discussion.

Engineers are problem solvers (by training and generally by temperament). You can't blame them for framing any new information as if it were a problem.

[Jupiter]

Hay NASAfanboy its my Sezess. Try to contact me on ROBLOX if you can.

[drakesdoom]

I withdraw all previous comments. If people are in the science section of a forum cannot grasp science and instead grasp for fear mongering hype, religion, and con artist pseudoscience, why would I expect better out of the general population?

[Comrade Jenkens]

Wow everyone does seem pretty pessimistic! If you decide something is impossible then it will be. But if you at least strive for a goal, no matter how far away it is, then you may just get there.

Even now private companies are starting to explore the possibilities of space and I hope that within the next 100 years space will be much more developed than it is today.

I've strived for the impossible for my whole life yet due to the fact I haven't given in I'm finally getting there. Don't write humanity off as doomed just yet.

[Sapphire Snow Leopard]

I know that it is a sad fact that you will never see a mission beyond Mars, but space travel needs a lot of money, something very few people want to fork out to explore some barren rocks that won't ever effect them. Even the Apollo Program was just a huge PR stunt, but now the motivation for such a thing is gone, and the politicians just don't see the need. Private space companies will likely never acquire enough funding. I don't think humanity's future is very bright, and when I look around I see little to be optimistic about. Sure, imagining fleets of starships zooming off to explore the great unknown is a fun fantasy, but it is just that, a fun fantasy. If we ever do go anywhere, it will be a couple decades at least before another human leaves Earth orbit.

[Seret]

But if you at least strive for a goal, no matter how far away it is, then you may just get there.

That's not really a good type of goal for an organisation to set. Generally the mantra for effective goal setting is:

Specific

Measurable

Assignable

Realistic

Time Specific

Setting wooly goals that aren't achievable, and where progress towards the final state can't be measured just results in unfocused confused activity. People work a lot more productively if they understand exactly how their work fits contributes to achieving the organisation's objectives. Specific is good, vague is bad.

It's ok to have long-term goals, but their only function should be to set the short-term goals. There's no point focussing on things like colonisation or interstellar flight right now, it would just result in a lot of unfocussed effort.

[Comrade Jenkens]

Setting wooly goals that aren't achievable, and where progress towards the final state can't be measured just results in unfocused confused activity. People work a lot more productively if they understand exactly how their work fits contributes to achieving the organisation's objectives. Specific is good, vague is bad.

If you only set goals for things judged to be possible now then technology will only advance at a crawl. This is the current mind-set I'm seeing way too much of. Many things have been judged impossible in the past yet are everyday things now.

Imagine if everyone who was working on trying to fly has simply said that it was impossible as many were and just given in!

People have to be able to take risks and throw themselves into the unknown to truly advance. Others on this thread seem to think that many things are impossible and so we should just give in trying.

As for those who are saying that humanity will soon be extinct or the future is dark, that is not a healthy mind-set to live with!.

[Godot]

If you only set goals for things judged to be possible now then technology will only advance at a crawl. This is the current mind-set I'm seeing way too much of. Many things have been judged impossible in the past yet are everyday things now.

Imagine if everyone who was working on trying to fly has simply said that it was impossible as many were and just given in!

People have to be able to take risks and throw themselves into the unknown to truly advance. Others on this thread seem to think that many things are impossible and so we should just give in trying.

As for those who are saying that humanity will soon be extinct or the future is dark, that is not a healthy mind-set to live with!.

We knew that birds can fly ... and there was already leonardo da Vinci who made sketches of an Apparatus that should enable humans to fly by imitating the fight of birds ... something called an ornithopter. Likewise there were several people who tried to fly (or at least glide) long before the Brothers Wright were born ... the Tailor of Ulm for example.

Therefore flying was something that was based on natural observations and much more sound than for example, flying to the next star system (especially if we talk about using shortcuts, like wormholes).

->It is easier to predict that, within the next centuries we will fly in the sky (as the birds do) than to predict that we will some day use wormholes for travel to the next stars (which is something we haven´t ever observed in nature)

Also, if we talk about generation ships instead of wormholes, the problem of usefulness coms into mind ... flight was of immediate usefulness (for example to cross obstacles, or to observe troop movements in war) ... it made sense to spend money in it.

Generation ships are of no special usefulness (except as an adventure for the colonists) at the moment ... we have all we need in our own solar system, even with our current technology reachable within few years of travel ... much less time than we would need to reach a neighboring star ... we can even colonize other planets in the solar system (well, at least mars, after terraforming) at much less costs and risks than it would be to construct a generation ship ... and we can conduct research on nearby star systems with unmanned probes (I assume, even the spanish would have used unmanned probes to research the sea route to india instead of sending columbus, had they possesed the technoligy (and had it been much cheaper sending an unmanned probe than to equip the 3 ships of Columbus)) ... sounds like no good preconditions to get the necessary funds out of any governmental (or private) organization, for the development of generation ships

[Seret]

If you only set goals for things judged to be possible now then technology will only advance at a crawl.

There are different types of progress. Much innovation is either taking an existing technology and adapting it to a new context, or taking an existing context and applying new technology to it. Then there's the pure inventive work of applying a new technology in a new context. That's the real blue sky work.

Moving forward in iterative steps doesn't slow progress. It's how science and engineering work, and it's how the modern world was built. I wouldn't judge the pace of progress in the last few centuries to be advancing "at a crawl". Even Isaac Newton acknowledged that his Principia was just a logical step onwards from the work of others:

If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.

Imagine if everyone who was working on trying to fly has simply said that it was impossible as many were and just given in!

Effectively flight was impossible until we developed some of the underpinning knowledge required to understand it (eg: Bernoulli) and a power plant light and powerful enough to power it (the internal combustion engine). It was impossible until it became possible, at which point it became a reality. It wouldn't have happened before that no matter how many people tried. The required technology wasn't ready.

Edited November 11, 2013 by Seret

[drakesdoom]

I already pointed out that the internal combustion engine was unnecessary for heavier than air flight. The internal combustion engine made it easier but the actual missing component was an airframe that produced lift. Once an understanding of how to produce lift with a wing structure is achieved flying is trivial with any power source.

[Comrade Jenkens]

Moving forward in iterative steps doesn't slow progress. It's how science and engineering work, and it's how the modern world was built. I wouldn't judge the pace of progress in the last few centuries to be advancing "at a crawl".

I agree that the modern words is moving at a very fast pace, and I think that we will continue to improve. What I'm disagreeing about is that many ppl seem to think that we will no longer keep advancing any more.

[Godot]

I agree that the modern words is moving at a very fast pace, and I think that we will continue to improve. What I'm disagreeing about is that many ppl seem to think that we will no longer keep advancing any more.

The problem between an abstract concept like "scientific progress" and real things like specific projects, that some projects might be impossible to complete, no matter how much "science points" you invest into the project.

For example, maybe we will increase the speed of our computers by a great margin ... but I don´t think we will ever be able to collapse a whle galaxy into a black hole, no matter how much time we invest

Same may be true for time travel or for the usage of wormholes as shortcuts to other stars ... although this may be all dependant on the structure of the universe around us

Edited November 11, 2013 by Godot