In reply to Duke :
We HAVE literally lost the technology, in the sense that the blueprints for the Saturn V are gone or never existed. Some of the components were built on the fly without blueprints. And the people who built them are long gone.
As for the political will... there is literally no reason to go back for the foreseeable future. It is basically an airless ball of ground glass. Any science we want to do there can be done with robotic equipment.
Pete. (l33t FS) said:In reply to Duke :
We HAVE literally lost the technology, in the sense that the blueprints for the Saturn V are gone or never existed. Some of the components were built on the fly without blueprints. And the people who built them are long gone.
We have not lost the technology; we may have lost records of the technology (if those records ever existed), but there are complete Saturn V rockets in existence.
They could be reverse engineered and physically duplicated. There is no technique or process they used that we are currently physically incapable of replicating.
There is just no point at all in doing so, and certainly no cost-effective reason to. I mean, there probably aren't complete blueprints to build a brand new B-17, either, but that doesn't mean we have lost the technology to build one.
Today I learned that the inability to pronounce the letter R is called "rhotacism."
This seems as unfair as the inability to pronounce the letter S, which is of course a lisp.
Seems trollish: Can't pronounce a letter? We're going to name that condition using the letter you can't pronounce.
Duke said:Pete. (l33t FS) said:In reply to Duke :
We HAVE literally lost the technology, in the sense that the blueprints for the Saturn V are gone or never existed. Some of the components were built on the fly without blueprints. And the people who built them are long gone.
We have not lost the technology; we may have lost records of the technology (if those records ever existed), but there are complete Saturn V rockets in existence.
They could be reverse engineered and physically duplicated. There is no technique or process they used that we are currently physically incapable of replicating.
There is just no point at all in doing so, and certainly no cost-effective reason to. I mean, there probably aren't complete blueprints to build a brand new B-17, either, but that doesn't mean we have lost the technology to build one.
Exactly, that's like saying we've lost the technology to make mechanical automatons that write things when clearly that's a basic technology that can be replicated at any time it's just not useful. We haven't lost the technology to make a model T, we just don't make them because they're obsolete. We have better rockets that can lift more with less fuel than a Saturn V. It's a 55 year old rocket, why on earth would we want to make more?
If we need blueprints of a Saturn V we would make blueprints. That's not the technology itself, that's a drawing of it. "The map is not the territory," after all.
In reply to Duke :
I've known you for years and I'm certain you're a very sharp guy but you just plowed right through everything I said like I've seen so many other people do.
My odds of life were based on a ridiculously generous set of assumptions...the entire visible universe is comprised of organic compounds (this controls for the possibility that life doesn't need to be carbon based and cranks the the dial up to 11 saying any form of matter is perfectly suitable for life)...the rate of mixing is based on Planck minimums of time and distance (in other words, the absolute greatest number of dice rolls physically possible).
Just take Planck time alone...there are far more Planck units of time in one second than there have been seconds since the big bang...my calculations (and those of multiple Ph.D. statisticians) allow for trillions and trillions of opportunities per second per planet for life to emerge and yet the math indicates that it's basically impossible for it to have ever occurred anywhere in the history of the visible universe even for a fleeting moment because life, even in its simplest form, requires something approaching a googolplex of opportunities.
Somehow, you managed to take what I said and get to one dice roll per planet.
I don't know what's more fascinating...working through the mathematics of life or seeing how paradigms interfere with perception.
Anyway, we have a "no circular loop" rule on this board and as you said "believe what you want to believe".
Bottom line, I'm not advocating anything other than the acknowledgement that neo-Darwinism, in its present form, is far from being a satisfying explanation for the origin of life.
Take care my friend.
In reply to RX Reven' :
I read your post carefully. I didn't plow through it. I'm just disagreeing with some of your assumptions (or sources), and therefore with some of your conclusions.
Also, I'm not sure where the term neo-Darwinism comes from in this context. But looking to Darwin to explain the origin of life is pointless, since it's not the arena Darwin was operating in - as Darwin himself (and you yourself) stipulated. His book was On The Origin Of Species, not On The Origin Of Life.
You take care, as well.
TIL - Fuel oil quoted at $7.45/gallon, delivered five days later at $7.84.
Coal is up 37% from last year.
914Driver said:TIL - Fuel oil quoted at $7.45/gallon, delivered five days later at $7.84.
Coal is up 37% from last year.
On the coal front, I know that business is booming. Reading & Northern went out and bought 200 more hopper cars and is building several more transload facilities to handle the uptick in anthracite traffic.
We have better rockets that can lift more with less fuel than a Saturn V.
I'm pretty sure I disagree with this. Everything else, I agree, and a Saturn VI would absolutely burn less fuel, but I don't think we've ever come up with anything that will lift as much out of Earth orbit as a Saturn V.
In reply to Streetwiseguy :
You are correct. Out of earth orbit payload was higher than anything we build now. But that's not to say we couldn't - we just don't need to.
TIL that reading an article on the universe and some quick whiskey math can turn into a civil discussion that makes my head hurt.
In reply to dculberson :
Agreed.
Today I learned that IF you have a house paid off it is far more complicated to get a cash out mortgage/loan than if the house has a small mortgage on it regardless of your credit score.
#Ijustwanttoexpandmyhouse
Stampie said:TIL that reading an article on the universe and some quick whiskey math can turn into a civil discussion that makes my head hurt.
You should sit down and watch a few podcasts with Graham Hancock and Randall Carlson. If the universe will make your head hurt, wait till you see the gate keeping and denial of evidence regarding local archeological history.
914Driver said:TIL - Fuel oil quoted at $7.45/gallon, delivered five days later at $7.84.
Coal is up 37% from last year.
TIL Connecticut fuel oil is $3 a gallon more than in PA. Holy carp.
Have you looked into the cost to switch to LPG or a pellet stove or something?
Today I learned, not all rv poop hose fittings are the same size.
Having never used the pooper in my rv, I decided that a new hose may be a good idea. Out with the old, on with the new.
Surprise, you can't dump the poop when the hose dont fit. The new fitting was about 1/2 in smaller.
Should have checked when I bought the hose.
RevRico said:Stampie said:TIL that reading an article on the universe and some quick whiskey math can turn into a civil discussion that makes my head hurt.
You should sit down and watch a few podcasts with Graham Hancock and Randall Carlson. If the universe will make your head hurt, wait till you see the gate keeping and denial of evidence regarding local archeological history.
Peer-reviewed science != Gatekeeping
[edit]
randallcarlson.com wrote:
Episode #084: California Wine Country Wildfires 2017 – Serpent Strikes Again!
Starting to provide links between these firestorms, resultant wastelands, and the forthcoming discussions on the meaning and purpose of the Holy Grail, Randall gets going on the various symbolism related to Serpents and Dragons. How far back, and how deep do the destructions from the agencies of fire and water go? And there’s this commonality between the stories from the wildfires we’ve been learning about – then right in front of our faces was a modern replay, that was almost totally missed! “It is the doom of Man, that we forget…”
Ohhhhhhhh... Kayyyyyyyyyy...
You know that yellow powder that comes in boxes of mac and cheese? TIL you can buy that stuff in fairly large jars. I'm gonna order some.
In reply to gearheadmb :
Make a bottle of "orange juice" to see who borrows other peoples' food from the fridge at work?
TIL that cannabis and hops both belong to the same family, Cannabaceae.
TIL that some local guy seems to be DD'ing a Cobra. I'm assuming it's a replica. I've seen him just after 7AM twice this week, on the same street, going the same direction. He's driving carefully, not showing off, and not taking the freeway. Hmmm ...
Chrissmith said:TIL that cannabis and hops both belong to the same family, Cannabaceae.
Also know that splicing hops onto the proper cannibis roots results in psychoactive hops. Or at least that's what I heard long ago and took as factual.
Streetwiseguy said:We have better rockets that can lift more with less fuel than a Saturn V.
I'm pretty sure I disagree with this. Everything else, I agree, and a Saturn VI would absolutely burn less fuel, but I don't think we've ever come up with anything that will lift as much out of Earth orbit as a Saturn V.
The Space Launch System (SLS), that is currently scheduled to launch in August of this year, will be close. The Block 1 configuration that is currently on the pad is supposed to be capable of lifting 26 tons out of earth orbit. The final Block 2 configuration has a design capability of lifting 45 tons out of earth orbit. By comparison, the Saturn V could move 48.6 tons out of earth orbit. One item of note is that the SLS will cost about 500 million/launch and the Saturn V cost 1.3 billion/launch in modern dollars.
TIL that one of the side effects of doing a build thread with video is that while I'm editing the video it makes me question pretty much everything I've done. I had to go back and look up the sealant path for the (very hard to get to) upper oil pan because it looked like I might have been doing it wrong in the video. Turns out that I did it correctly, but for about 15 minutes there I was starting to panic.
Entropyman said:Streetwiseguy said:We have better rockets that can lift more with less fuel than a Saturn V.
I'm pretty sure I disagree with this. Everything else, I agree, and a Saturn VI would absolutely burn less fuel, but I don't think we've ever come up with anything that will lift as much out of Earth orbit as a Saturn V.
The Space Launch System (SLS), that is currently scheduled to launch in August of this year, will be close. The Block 1 configuration that is currently on the pad is supposed to be capable of lifting 26 tons out of earth orbit. The final Block 2 configuration has a design capability of lifting 45 tons out of earth orbit. By comparison, the Saturn V could move 48.6 tons out of earth orbit. One item of note is that the SLS will cost about 500 million/launch and the Saturn V cost 1.3 billion/launch in modern dollars.
SpaceX claims that they will deliver 100 tons to the moon with Starship. The plan is to launch to LEO, refuel there (with fuel launched by other Starships) then head to the moon (or Mars). I swear a saw a number at least an order of magnitude less than SLS for a ton delivered to the moon somewhere but can't find it now.
So far, SpaceX has delivered on what they promised, we'll see.
You'll need to log in to post.
