Science - strawberry float YEAH

PostRe: Science - strawberry float YEAH by **SEP** » Sun Nov 23, 2014 9:47 pm

[iup=3621262]Falsey[/iup] wrote:Or produce them on the moon.

From what resources?

Cheese.

PostRe: Science - strawberry float YEAH by **Qikz** » Sun Nov 23, 2014 10:48 pm

[iup=3621291]Somebody Else's Problem[/iup] wrote:
[iup=3621262]Falsey[/iup] wrote:Or produce them on the moon.

From what resources?

First we build our space elevator. Then using that we go mine asteroids, then we set up the base on the moon and start building a fleet.

[iup=3621291]Somebody Else's Problem[/iup] wrote:
[iup=3621262]Falsey[/iup] wrote:Or produce them on the moon.

From what resources?

Minerals in the local environment? Underground items of interest? Vast solar arrays feeding ion engines? Heat farms?

Come on, now.

Given that the commonly accepted theory on the Moons creation is that it was formed from a collision between the Earth and something the size of Mars, it's not unreasonable to assume there would be plenty of resources up there for use in construction.

PostRe: Science - strawberry float YEAH by **Meep** » Sun Nov 23, 2014 11:24 pm

[iup=3621213]Lagamorph[/iup] wrote:Launching from the Moon in significantly reduced gravity, along with the lack of atmosphere, means that a launch needs a hell of a lot less fuel to get off the ground. You're also not at the mercy of the weather screwing things up at the last second.

Again, you would need to get your equipment to the moon in order to launch from there, meaning you would have already gone to the trouble of reaching orbit. There is no benefit on stopping off at the moon.

It would be faster to fly to Germany if you started out from France. Well, yes it would, but we are not in France. No point in going there and getting a transfer when you can take a direct flight.

It takes considerably less delta-v to escape moon orbit than it does to escape earth orbit.

A spaceship capable of transporting two or three people to Mars would require a huge rocket to escape Earth's gravity- far bigger than a Saturn 5. It would be much easier to build it in orbit and set off from there. Essentially it'd be like the spaceport in 2001 it would make travelling to and from the Moon much easier too.

Or in other words, it's easier to move ten 100kg rocks than a 1 tonne boulder.

PostRe: Science - strawberry float YEAH by **Meep** » Mon Nov 24, 2014 8:16 pm

Building in orbit would make sense if you were constructing a large ship as it would be easier to send it up in sections like you would a station.

http://www.iflscience.com/technology/wo ... robot-body

Scientists put a worm's mind in a robot body. Because strawberry float you that's why.

PostRe: Science - strawberry float YEAH by **False** » Mon Dec 15, 2014 8:38 pm

Or would it serve as a real monument to the idea that lots of humans do in fact have the collective goal of cosmic expansion, so much so they all worked together to get off one planetoid and try and set up on another?

Nah, your nihilist handbook for 12 year olds explanation probably fits better.

But we already thought of reasons...

PostRe: Science - strawberry float YEAH by **Xeno** » Mon Dec 15, 2014 10:30 pm

Production of equipment is easier in a microgravity compared to zero gravity. There, now we need a moon base.

[iup=3636928]Lucien[/iup] wrote:
[iup=3636783]Jesus is Dead[/iup] wrote:Or would it serve as a real monument to the idea that lots of humans do in fact have the collective goal of cosmic expansion, so much so they all worked together to get off one planetoid and try and set up on another?

Ach, loads of people say we need a moon base way before they think of a reason. I was being a little sarcy, but one of the reasons they'd build a base (regardless) is to aid those feelings of progress and destiny and hope; it'll give most people that.

Fair enough I put 'fake' monument in, because I see it as a sort of scientific Kaaba people will look to, but if you take that word out I was being serious.

What of science for sciences sake? Adventure for adventures sake?

PostRe: Science - strawberry float YEAH by **False** » Tue Dec 16, 2014 3:47 pm

Ethical discussions of the impact of scientific endeavours are completely welcome here. The problem is your inherent bias in the belief that the creation of more and prolonging of existing lives is inherently suffering in itself.

That any scientific endeavour is moot because all we are doing is delaying the inevitable for our own selfish ends is a hugely narrow minded and selfish viewpoint.

What of finding out the secrets of this wonderful universe? What of facing off against impossible odds and winning (albeit briefly, and minorly)? What of learning more about this world we inhabit? Humans are an adventurous, curious, ingenious bunch and its in our nature to explore and, for lack of a better word, conquer.

PostRe: Science - strawberry float YEAH by **Qikz** » Tue Dec 16, 2014 4:16 pm

The big question to you Lucien is why do you believe the only purpose of life is to suffer and die? Why can't the purpose of life be to explore, to learn and to pave the way for people after you to achieve even greater things?

PostRe: Science - strawberry float YEAH by **False** » Tue Dec 16, 2014 5:07 pm

Your whole argument is that life is suffering and death is inevitable. Are you going to attempt to tell me you have never once experienced joy - or happiness - or awe - or love - or enjoyed the fruits of your labour - or the product of a difficult trial? Id argue that the chance of the experience of happiness and joy and love and experience itself far outweighs the chance that I might be a little bit scared of being dead one day.

Id imagine you are probably in the very tiny minority of people anywhere who think all life should end because those brought into being dont make the choice to be so. To cease all development as a species based on the fear that one in however many thousands of lives will be a bit miffed about the whole deal is nonesensical. Besides, I think we are well on the way to proper legal and humane channels for people to self euthanise, so I think the avenue out exists if you want it.

As for the animal kingdom being hell on earth, I think thats hyperbole to the extreme. Some live, some die, some eat, some get eaten. My puppy seems pretty happy. The crickets that I used to feed to the tarantula probably less so, though they did get some lovely apples and lettuce before the end.

PostRe: Science - strawberry float YEAH by **That** » Tue Dec 16, 2014 5:17 pm

Lucien feels (more or less) that since some proportion of our society may be unhappy whatever we achieve, we should give up on the whole endeavour.

The rest of us feel that there is inherent worth in most people's lives - that most people are happy to be here and feel good about working towards a better future for themselves, their friends and families, our species, and so on - and therefore the achievements of civilisation are worthwhile.

Lucien: You have to accept that you are literally never going to convince anyone here of your world-view. Please stop trying! This argument has popped up again and again for quite literally years at this point, and I believe I have warned you previously for derailing threads with it. It's not because I disagree with you, it's because this is tedious as strawberry float for everyone else involved.

EDIT: I feel I should clarify that you are welcome to debate the ethics of science here - but you aren't welcome to turn this into another "Life is suffering!" "Err, no it isn't..." debate. We've been there, we've talked about it, and no-one wants to talk about it again.

PostRe: Science - strawberry float YEAH by **Pedz** » Tue Dec 16, 2014 5:18 pm

Is it odd for soneone to say that life should not be, but then be alive?

PostRe: Science - strawberry float YEAH by **False** » Tue Dec 16, 2014 5:22 pm

[iup=3637391]Pedz[/iup] wrote:Is it odd for soneone to say that life should not be, but then be alive?

Ive asked this in the past, and the answer seems to be: "Well Im here now arent I?"

Science - strawberry float YEAH

Who is online

Affiliates