Science!
-
That makes the data coming out of it much prettier than other space-based telescopes.
Yeah, if nothing else, it's really marketable.
-
That makes the data coming out of it much prettier than other space-based telescopes.
The various solar observatories produce awesome images of our nearest star, in lots of different wavelengths too. The X-ray views are often quite amazing.
Since this image originates with NASA, copying it here is A-OK, copyright-wise.
-
If you ever want to be depressed, think about this: we (meaning humanity) have literally no way of launching anything Hubble-sized at the moment.
I beg to differ. Hubble weighs a little over 11 t and is in low earth orbit. There are many operational launch systems that can take that load and while a bit under 29 t the strongest currently operational launcher, Delta IV-H, can launch to low earth orbit pales in comparison of retired Saturn V's 118 t, it's still more than enough for decent telescope.
-
Once enthusiasm dies out, the reality sinks in. Space requires too much investment and has too little returns.
-
Especially when you consider that we still haven't managed to get anyone to Mars and don't have technology that could get someone there and back. Getting to the next solar system would take an enormous amount of time and money, and there would be no benefit for anyone alive on Earth at the time the mission started.
-
Space requires too much investment and has too little returns.
Today, perhaps.
"Experts" once claimed we shouldn't sail too far from land, or we'd fall off the edge of the sea. Then Christopher Columbus persisted and discovered America. "Experts" once claimed it would be impossible for a man to fly through the air. Then the Wright Bros. persisted and gave us the airplane. "Experts" once claimed we could never go into space, put a man on the moon, etc. The Soviets gave us Sputnik, the United States gave us Apollo 11's Neil Armstrong setting foot on the moon.
All of these endeavors were funded, too.
Now we have an expert saying warp drive is (virtually) impossible. Today, perhaps. But we'll find a way. If history has taught us anything, it's that what is impossible today isn't necessarily impossible tomorrow, especially given the persistence of a few dedicated humans. ;-)
-
"Experts" once claimed we shouldn't sail too far from land, or we'd fall off the edge of the sea. Then Christopher Columbus persisted and discovered America. "Experts" once claimed it would be impossible for a man to fly through the air. Then the Wright Bros. persisted and gave us the airplane. "Experts" once claimed we could never go into space, put a man on the moon, etc. The Soviets gave us Sputnik, the United States gave us Apollo 11's Neil Armstrong setting foot on the moon.
Wow, I think every fact in that paragraph is wrong.
-
-
Wow, I think every fact in that paragraph is wrong.
Then prove it. Fact by fact, I want you to refute @redwizard. If you can't: shut up.
-
Right, Blakey reminded me to respond to this.
"Experts" once claimed we shouldn't sail too far from land, or we'd fall off the edge of the sea. Then Christopher Columbus persisted and discovered America.
Actually no one at the time thought the Earth was flat. They knew it was a sphere. They even knew the diameter. So they did some calculations and decided no ship could sail around the globe and reach India from the east. Too far away, not enough supplies, no crew would agree to it. And they were right, given the limitations of technology at the time.
It's Columbus who was wrong in this case. He miscalculated the diameter of the Earth. Thought it was much smaller than it is and that he could make it with a few ships. If Americas didn't exist, he would have been remembered as the bungler who sailed into his doom because he sucked at math.
"Experts" once claimed it would be impossible for a man to fly through the air. Then the Wright Bros. persisted and gave us the airplane.
This one is the closest to being right.
You're probably thinking of the comment some idiot cavalry commander made in the late 19-century, referring to heavier than air flying machines (hot air balloons had existed for a hundred years by that point). Everyone likes to point that out, the same way future generations will laugh at our solar roadways, vaccine hysteria and global warming denial.
The truth is, by the time Wrights made their flight, it was basically a race to see who would get there first. No one doubted it was possible. They were not lone hero inventors who paved the way, just the lucky blokes who won the race once the slow march of technology created the conditions where airplanes were inevitable.
"Experts" once claimed we could never go into space, put a man on the moon, etc. The Soviets gave us Sputnik, the United States gave us Apollo 11's Neil Armstrong setting foot on the moon.
No expert ever said that. Certainly nowhere near the time the space race was starting.
All of these endeavors were funded, too.
For Columbus and the Wrights, the funding was minuscule. The kind of money a rich investor can fork out personally, or the crown throw away without a second thought.
The initial push to space was a part of the Cold War. As soon as it became apparent there's no big military advantage to conquering the space, the cash dried up on both sides. There's no way that kind of money would be available if not for the defense aspect.
Now we have an expert saying warp drive is (virtually) impossible. Today, perhaps. But we'll find a way. If history has taught us anything, it's that what is impossible today isn't necessarily impossible tomorrow, especially given the persistence of thousands of humans, over many coming centuries, if we don't destroy ourselves in the meantime
FTFY
-
Is @blakeyrat your sockpuppet or are you @blakeyrat's sockpuppet?
-
I would never post an idiotic science fiction cliche like the "oh noes humanity is going to destroy itself in the near future!" bullshit in the last quote.
-
Is @blakeyrat your sockpuppet or are you @blakeyrat's sockpuppet?
I would never post an idiotic science fiction cliche like the "oh noes humanity is going to destroy itself in the near future!" bullshit in the last quote.
"Yeah, cartman is a complete duechebag and idiot and not handsome and smart like me!"
-
duechebag
Typo not counting, finally decided to look it up on Urban Dictionary to see if I was getting it right. First thought after reading was: "Yup, Jeff."What has Discourse done with me???
-
All your points are valid. Please keep in mind it's all relative.
Granted the experts at the time of Columbus weren't all thinking the Earth was flat, but at one time that was the prevailing opinion. Same for the others. The point is that as we continue to explore, innovate, and push for something better, eventually we'll get there (and not necessarily without fails in the interim). I'm not saying we'll have warp drive or some equivalent by the time I'm retired, but it wouldn't surprise me if it became a reality a few more generations down the line.
On a smaller scale, I'm sure many of us have run into that on the job. PHB or "expert" says it can't be done, we then DO it and prove otherwise - and often don't get any appreciation for it either.
As for blakeyrats' obvious trolling (which may or may not be an attempt at being funny), while I appreciate the supporting sentiments from you and others here, I am of the opinion that it's getting far more attention than it deserves. I prefer to give attention to actual funnies or points.
-
but at one time that was the prevailing opinion.
until the 3rd century BC, when Hellenistic astronomy established the spherical shape of the earth as a physical given
So, only, y'know, 1700 years before Columbus.
-
The Flat Earth model is an archaic belief that the Earth's shape is a plane or disk. Many ancient cultures have had conceptions of a flat Earth, including Greece until the classical period, the Bronze Age and Iron Age civilizations of the Near East until the Hellenistic period, India until the Gupta period (early centuries AD) and China until the 17th century. It was also typically held in the aboriginal cultures of the Americas, and a flat Earth domed by the firmament in the shape of an inverted bowl is common in pre-scientific societies.
So, y'know, even after Columbus proved it was spherical. Kind of like my on the job point just a few posts up. :P
-
<sigh>
-
So, only, y'know, 1700 years before Columbus.
To make a statement like that implying everyone knew way before Columbus' time that the Earth was spherical is what warranted the response. If you're going to prove someone wrong, take the time to examine the other side as well as the statement itself in context.
I was not invalidating your data - you are right in that the concept of a spherical Earth existed way before Columbus' time. I was only invalidating the method of presentation, which I perceived as not allowing any rightness on my part, esp. since my point was originally: ""Experts" once claimed we shouldn't sail too far from land, or we'd fall off the edge of the sea." I did not specify when that time was, and the prevailing interpretation from the responses here so far seem to be that of a few years before Columbus set sail, not centuries before. Perhaps I could have been more detailed in my initial assertion.
Peace?
-
Depends who these "experts" are. There are a lot of "experts" who are not experts. (Note quotes).
With any human pursuit there are going to be deniers. Too often they get all the press, and it is almost always for their own interests over the interests of the general population.
-
I want to become an expert in a very narrow field that has no real-world application.
-
Try writing forum software...
-
I mean something like "1430s princess kidnapping expert" or "the color #70fc71 expert" or "factors of 93326215443944152681699238856266700490715968264381621468592963895217599993229915608941463976156518286253697920827223758251185210916864 expert"
-
@redwizard is almost right! (I am an "expert" on that)
You should definitly become a Discourse-expert!Filed Under: No real life application AT all
-
I mean something like "1430s princess kidnapping expert" or "the color #70fc71 expert" or "factors of 93326215443944152681699238856266700490715968264381621468592963895217599993229915608941463976156518286253697920827223758251185210916864 expert"
Too serious ;-)
-
I want to become an expert in a very narrow field that has no real-world application.
[spoiler]Dwarf Fortress[/spoiler]? [spoiler]Discourse[/spoiler]?
-
To make a statement like that implying everyone knew way before Columbus' time that the Earth was spherical is what warranted the response. If you're going to prove someone wrong, take the time to examine the other side as well as the statement itself in context.
Right, the Greeks showed that the earth not only was, but had to be spherical. That's without circumnavigating the globe, or any of that old cack, they knew the earth was spherical because science.
That knowledge followed through into the thinking adopted by the Catholic church (who are usually painted as the pitchfork-brandishing anti-science lot). there was discussion as to exactly what form the earth had, but it was never suggested that East doesn't eventually meet West, and similarly for North and South. In the 5th century (a thousand or so years before Columbus), Augustine suggested that although East and West eventually connected, there was no way to actually do it because of the terrible weather. Yes, really.
1000 years later, Columbus, along with all serious thinkers including those in the Catholic Church, knew the earth was spherical, although he was rather unsure of its size. After all, he was looking for a way of sailing to India without having to go round Cape Horn, not out to discover new lands.
Curvature of the earth is very difficult to ignore. Especially for seafarers, who see sails disappear below the horizon, or even for anyone who has approached a mountain. Indeed, nautical navigation of the time relied on the curvature of the earth.
Sorry, but you're wrong. Irving's biography of Columbus is bullshit.
-
Sorry, but you're wrong. Irving's biography of Columbus is bullshit.
My turn to sigh (how did you get the braces in there? &^%$# DissedCourse). And I don't care about Irving's biography, I wasn't referencing that.
Please read the second paragraph in my last post to you again. Your response does not match that data.
My whole point in my write-up is that with regard to warp drive, is that this is yet another example where there are naysayers with regard to a new bold seemingly-hard-to-believe initiative. From the time of the initial "you're crazy, can't be done" attitude to a successful proof of concept and application in real life, that time period can be measured in terms of seconds or millenia. It does not matter how long from one to the other. The point is it happened. That's all I'm saying. I have yet to see you show me anything that disproves that.
If you're trying to disprove a claim that Columbus intended to discover America, you're right, except I never claimed that. I was merely trying to illustrate that because Columbus was certain the world was round, he set out to prove it by sailing west. The fact that it led to the discovery of America was a bonus - but it never would have happened until someone went to prove the Earth was round and get on a boat and go that way. (Either that, or eventually someone in a hot air balloon or airplane would have made it, it makes no difference.)
If you still think I'm wrong, so be it. At least blakey knows he's not alone. :-/
-
naysayers
That reminds me of this headline (from one of the SimCity series, back before I got bored with them): “Naysayers say nay.”
I was merely trying to illustrate that because Columbus was certain the world was round, he set out to prove it by sailing west.
The curious thing is that if Columbus had known just how far it was to the East Indies (i.e., what's now Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines), he would never have set out on that journey at all. He would have had problems carrying enough provisions, given the speed of the ships he had available to him. It was only because he (well, cartographers) had massively overestimated the size of Asia that he even attempted it.
Sometimes you've got to stop measuring what you know and step into the unknown…
-
Dig up Cfgauss from the old forums, he seemed to fit that description.
-
how did you get the braces in there?
Quoted entities, the natural predator of shit forum software. Or, more explicitly,<sigh>. Simples …
@redwizard said:Please read the second paragraph in my last post to you again. Your response does not match that data.
OK, I'll bite. Here it is...
@redwizard said:I was not invalidating your data - you are right in that the concept of a spherical Earth existed way before Columbus' time. I was only invalidating the method of presentation, which I perceived as not allowing any rightness on my part, esp. since my point was originally: ""Experts" once claimed we shouldn't sail too far from land, or we'd fall off the edge of the sea." I did not specify when that time was, and the prevailing interpretation from the responses here so far seem to be that of a few years before Columbus set sail, not centuries before. Perhaps I could have been more detailed in my initial assertion.
OK, you didn't specify exactly when those "experts" existed. I put it to you, though, that the existence of "experts" naysaying something nearly 2,000 years before somebody finally putting that something into action hardly vindicates that person as a "forward thinker".Hell, Columbus wasn't even very good as a navigator. The reason Portugal wouldn't fund him, and he had to go begging to Spain, was because the King of Portugal's experts pointed out that Columbus' math was wrong; if he hadn't managed to run into land where he did, he wouldn't have come back at all because he wasn't carrying, and couldn't possibly carry given the size of his ships, enough food to make it to India. The circumference of the earth was well known at the time, it's a relatively simple calculation for any navigator to make; the king's experts knew where India was, and therefore how far Columbus had to travel to get there.
Why had nobody done this before Columbus? Because fully equipped expeditions into places unknown are expensive and dangerous. The ocean is big, really big, when you're in a little sailing boat; effectively heading out west amounted to betting your life and a lot of somebody else's money on hitting some potentially nonexistent target.
So, here's your original quote:
@redwizard said:"Experts" once claimed we shouldn't sail too far from land, or we'd fall off the edge of the sea. Then Christopher Columbus persisted and discovered America.
This strongly implies that, at the time Columbus set sail, the flat earth theory was commonplace. It wasn't, at least amongst mariners, and hadn't been for over a thousand years.
-
Columbus was a business-man. His proposal was that it's more economical to get products from "the orient", specifically India, by sailing there than by sending long, dangerous, caravans over land. To this end, he argued that the diameter of the Earth was small enough to allow a well-provisioned ship to make the journey safely.
He was dead wrong.
Fortunately, though, he was able to barely make a journey to a continent that was unknown to him at the time. And, since he had no idea what India actually looked like, that's where he assumed he was. Then he proceeded to be fucking awful to everybody until he died. The end.
Columbus was a lucky idiot. Focusing on his achievements ignores the true heroes of sail, who not only were a lot better at their jobs, but (generally-speaking) understood that they must work with the indigenous peoples, not against them.
The curious thing is that if Columbus had known just how far it was to the East Indies (i.e., what's now Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines), he would never have set out on that journey at all. He would have had problems carrying enough provisions, given the speed of the ships he had available to him. It was only because he (well, cartographers) had massively overestimated the size of Asia that he even attempted it.
Actually a hologram from the future impersonating an angel told him to sail west instead of joining the Crusades. According to Orson Scott Card's only decent book.
-
Actually a hologram from the future impersonating an angel told him to sail west instead of joining the Crusades. According to Orson Scott Card's only decent book.
Hmm, a one star review from goodreads:
No one can begrudge Card for using Sci-Fi as a field for propaganda: the medium itself (world-creation/world-defining) by nature almost requires it.
But unless you're rather fond of the idea that mormon "family values" are somehow universal, and extend throughout the whole history of humanity, than you might not go for this book.
I didn't.
If you're the sort who watches the history channel and finds it profound, somehow missing the propaganda within a narrative of human actions throughout recorded time which asserts a long succession of wars to be an adequate measure of the passage of human activity, than perhaps you'll have no problem with Card's proposed defense for european colonialism (his thesis: it could have been worse--we could have let the natives handle things!).
Now I'm really interested. On to a reading list.
-
Wow.
Ok, I'm 100% for people being pissed at Card for his religious views, which are fucking awful and I'm 110% all for people being pissed at Card for inserting his religious views into his books, but this book was written before he started doing that bullshit.
Secondly:
Card's proposed defense for european colonialism (his thesis: it could have been worse--we could have let the natives handle things!).
That is the exact opposite of what happens in the book! THE EXACT FUCKING OPPOSITE!
Although I will say that the one part of their expedition that was a little questionable was attempting to introduce a new religion to the Americas that was more "compatible" with Christianity.
But other than that, the entire point was to provide American natives with immunity to smallpox and other diseases that the Europeans brought, and to prevent Columbus' homeward journey to give the natives time to 1) examine and counter European technology, and 2) make Columbus dependent on their goodwill and thus less of a fucking jackass.
I'm guessing that guy just hates Card so much he went in and reviewed a ton of books he never read.
EDIT: oh he might have been referring to the proposed alternative Columbus-goes-to-the-crusades timeline theory maybe? So he read like the first third of the book. And that theory does involve Americans conquering Europe, but frankly, I'm pretty sure even in the universe of the book nobody believed that was a likely scenario. The reality is the people of the book, based on the rules of their time machine, have literally no way of knowing why the first time travels directed Columbus westward.
-
This post is deleted!
-
it sounds like utter ideological crap.
... what ideology are you attaching to it? WTF?
-
Although I will say that the one part of their expedition that was a little questionable was attempting to introduce a new religion to the Americas that was more "compatible" with Christianity.
It's not just "a little questionable" - it basically seems to turn the book to another "bringing Christianity and God to savage tyrrants of evil" story. At least that's judging by the plot summary, because I still consider every single thing written by OSC crap, and thus no longer read it.
Maybe Ender's game was a bit less crap.
-
The only two novels I liked by OSC:
- The first Ender's Game (duh)
- A Planet Called Treason (very strange but interesting teen power-fantasy)
It should be pointed out at the point the Columbus thing was published, Card was already going down the deep end:
The Memory of Earth (1992) is the first book of the Homecoming Saga by Orson Scott Card. The award-winning Homecoming saga is a loose sci-fi fictionalization of the first few hundred years recorded in the Book of Mormon.
That was published 4 years before Pastwatch.
Doesn't mean it's bad, though. One of my favorite light SF novels is Battlefield Earth.
-
It's not just "a little questionable" - it basically seems to turn the book to another "bringing Christianity and God to savage tyrrants of evil" story.
Well whatever, it makes sense in context because most people in the future world are athiests and their only interest in religion is in how they can shape it to advance their goals. I didn't find it offensive myself, but I could see how a devout non-Christian might.
Maybe Ender's game was a bit less crap.
Ugh. Don't get me started on that shit.
-
His proposal was that it's more economical to get products from "the orient", specifically India, by sailing there than by sending long, dangerous, caravans over land.
Though what was meant by “India” is a little bit confused. He wasn't distinguishing between India and Indonesia or any of the places in between: it was all “places far away that produced spices” and Europe was really extremely keen on obtaining spices at that time (in order to make food more palatable and better able to be preserved).
-
Vaguely on topic (and because it got necro'd recently on their mail list)
Because they, uh, couldn't see it in the fog. I am not making this up.
-
This strongly implies that, at the time Columbus set sail, the flat earth theory was commonplace. It wasn't, at least amongst mariners, and hadn't been for over a thousand years.
Fortunately, though, he was able to barely make a journey to a continent that was unknown to him at the time. And, since he had no idea what India actually looked like, that's where he assumed he was. Then he proceeded to be fucking awful to everybody until he died. The end.
Columbus was a lucky idiot.
I concede that the example was bad. Still, without that lucky idiot, it would have probably been a few hundred more years before we (European perspective) knew what the other side of the world looked like!
-
"factors of 93326215443944152681699238856266700490715968264381621468592963895217599993229915608941463976156518286253697920827223758251185210916864 expert"
Try 2
Also 4
-
Everyone likes to point that out, the same way future generations will laugh at our solar roadways, vaccine hysteria and global warming
denialhysteria.FTFY
Filed Under: now with bonus misogyny
-
Well whatever, it makes sense in context because most people in the future world are athiests and their only interest in religion is in how they can shape it to advance their goals.
Sounds like he re-invented the Bene Gesserit.
-
Everyone likes to point that out, the same way future generations will laugh at our solar roadways, vaccine hysteria and global warming [s]denial[/s][b]hysteria[/b].
FTFY
You conveniently forget that the one saving grace about all this global warming brouhaha is that it is causing people to start using CO2 as a knob, one that very conveniently is a rather good one for motivating people to look seriously at their fossil fuel consumption. Considering that running out of the stuff is an eventuality...isn't it good that we're actually motivated to wean ourselves off of it now, rather than guzzling it dry and then panic'ing when the barrel's empty?
-
Except we're not weaning ourselves off. We're just taking high fuel prices in the bum like a man and burning more and more of the stuff like normal.
Personally I ride my motorcycle as much as possible, even in winter. Which reminds me of another greenie WTF: my 250cc motorcycle has more emissions control equipment than the 6.6L V8 in my pickup. (to be fair the motorcycle is also 10 years newer...but c'mon 2004 wasn't that long ago)
-
isn't it good that we're actually motivated to wean ourselves off of it now, rather than guzzling it dry and then panic'ing when the barrel's empty?
There are other motivations, including increased scarcity. And for the record, I don't think religious panics over end of the world scenarios are good ways to attempt to change the world.
-
Hey peanut gallery, go read the fucking book.
-
That's a barrier to discussion. Having said that, the book sounds interesting, and I don't have an ideological axe to grind against the author, so I've put it on my list.
Spherical Earth - Wikipedia
How could the Russians not discover America? It was only 50 miles away!
