Intelligence

I am completely and totally INCORRECT. Either the science channel hyped the telescope up and made my mind think it wa hugely successfull or I am malfunctioning. It has since found only two planets HD 209458b first and then Ogle-TR-56b You are correct. (fuck, I got told by a dancing banana, there's goes my ego.)

From Earth they blink because of atmospheric polution. From space it's merely contant eclipses. From the view point of standing on the moon one could, using a nice man-made telescope, experiencing eclipses every single second forever.

Here is the page on the Europa mission - I was wrong: http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/missions/jup_missns/jup-europa.html This here is the mission I was most likely thinking of: http://www.nasa.gov/missions/deepspace/galex_mission.html

If you sat in outerspace beyond our atmosphere (which causes stars to blink as well) you would indeed see stars blinking, yes. They blink more obviously than the blinks caused by the earths atmosphere that we see every night. And yes you could see them blink anywhere within your main field of vision.

Calm down I watch to much science channel might be confused. I am searching NASA for the answers to these right now....

I'll give you a hint. You have two of them on your face right now.

Banana - Well see to me searching for planets and searching for life on planets is the same thing... ....To me it's the only thing worth spending time looking beyond the blue sky.... ..so that's what I meant, it's one and the same to me.

The reason I don't link is frankly because - as I just have confirmed in your link - the internet is filled with incorrect or lying articles. Shit man I could link you to a news article posted this year claiming the earth is flat........ I'm a book man, not an internet news man - I will try hear to find NASA info on the tele for you though...thanks for the interest. Yes I too want to see more about this europa mission - do you recall when it was too begin? Wasn't the space shuttle already sent out? Of course the water on mars thing needs to be checked out but i dunno Europa is more exotic.

This article is entirely wrong. Either that or it's using wish-wash terms to disrey you. Let me explain - every single planet at all times makes a straight line from it to it's sun. The telescope makes a straight line to the star. As long as the planet passes within this line it is detected. Now you might be quick and dumb to say well what's the chance that if the star covers say 3.6 degress, that the planet crosses it.......the answer is of course 1 in 100 But there are BILLIONS OF STARS and thus even 1% of these means the telescope will see 1000's Also that article indeed is incorrect, there have been MANY planets seen passing over stars.

I know what he said and I responded accordingly. You need to do a little introspective and extrapolation and not need it spoon fed. These planets are constantly tested for parameters required for life and the ones which meet them are noted. furthermore, I am well aware of RVM and it is completely and totally a useless method. RVM will answer ones question and one question only: How much gravitational force is pulling on a star. It will not answer whether these are moons of planets, other stars, a belt of comets or asteroids or meteors, other planets, one big planet or ten tiny ones. It is 100% inferior. The telescopic method tells precisely how MANY planets are orbiting the star, there exact size, exact orbit, there own revolution, if they have moons and the moon sizes and orbits...of the solar system has asteroids, how much mass of asteroids It is SUPERIOR in everyway. One extra point for you two since you seem intelligent enough. Life could be on moons as well -we have moons in our solar system which are well developed - yes they're chatoic as hell but they do have atmospheres and environmental activity - unlike our moon. So perhaps the life we find might be on some moon! Of course I still think that NASA mission to..what is it Europa or Io, is a great idea...

Jakiri - Incorrect. This was a rather hacked up method used many years ago which was extremely slow, stupid, and pointless. The telescope now used to study blinking gathers data hundreds of times better and empirically NOT theoretically. Banana man - What do you mean by the time we are searching for extrasolar planets..... ......I sincerely hope you aware that there are currently over 160 extra solar planets known and catagorized. And last I checked NASA is still here and so is america

Your memory apparently does not serve well. I am completely correct.

If you are acting out violence towards a child for the sake of acting it out fine. If you are acting out violence towards a child because you think this will lessen the occurence of an act you are DEAD WRONG. All research shows children will not only increase the activity being punished but will step up to higher levels of the same unwanted acts. As for navajo's comments. You said it yourself, you're emotionally attached to an issue and can't think critically.

Yes it's already done. But I don't have the technology behind it. Keep in mind I'm looking to do this for the sake of doing it. Not for the sake of showing it off or being original.

I'm definetely looking at it sensing textual input. I would want to completely finish this before ever integrating a speech converter - and then merely place the speech convertor on top of the textual input....... I would possibly integrate it, thanks! Right now I am researching and seeing about the project concepts and how it would be best executed...

The first goal is to use the giant telescope in space to look at stars. First stars must be tested to see if they have planets - this is done by measuring blinks of stars when planets pass in front Once a star has been shown to HAVE a planet, it must be determined the size of planet and it's distance from the sun to see if it lies within the golden ratio based on sun temperature and distance from the sun Once this is done the planet is labeled as a candidate SETI would then pay close attention to transmissions coming from this direction - which works only if the life sends such things...unlikely. After identifying that hey man it's up to NASA or other countries space orgs to do what they do...... ...which right now is nearly nothing.

I was playing music and your little banana man was dancing to the beat! Freaky Anyhow - NASA has no particular goal to find life, NASA is merely a gatherer of any information and it weighs it's mission based on a ratio of: possible gain if info ------------------------ expense of mission + time to launch mission

Ok let's take a look at this nonsensical response. Heroine is costly and has diminishing effects each time it is taken. So what. This has nothing to do with it being a problem at all whatsoever. If someone ends up with a habit that is beyond their budget they can very willfully STOP the habit. It's their choice - and yes they absolutely 100% have the choice, thus it isn't a problem at all. No one HAS to use old dirty needles, thus these are NOT a problem involving heroine. No one HAS to rob someone to get money for heroin. You see you're taking the same unintelligent position that these drug war nazis take. In reality none of these things have anything to do with heroin, they all occur regardless of heroin, and heroin can occur without them. So you have failed to say anything to back up your claim. In the future don't waste peoples time with this! Give evidence to back up your claim.

NSX - I was being a bit sarcastic towards the end. Indeed spanking increases the activity which one is attempting to stop, but that's in the context that it is as you said rebelious. The statement after that was somewhat of a digression and would not work in reality.

First off using the word solution implies there is a problem with heroin addiction. What is the problem? A person chooses to take heroin every single time they take it. So are you trying to take away someones choice of what to do and force them to do what you want them to do? Heroin isn't a problem.

Perhaps I put too much emphasis on the FINAL PRODUCT of this thing. It's main initial purpose is merely to take an input sentence and be able to give many proper values about: 1. the sentence 2. Each word in the sentence That is merely it's main initial goal This would be the input and half process phase. The second part is the putput processesing and the output itself, which is a hole nuther story. Eh you're right who the hell would wanna program this what a bore.

train ewwww. trains are worse than funerals.

Using physical punishment on children has been scientifically proven to actually INCREASE the amount of unwanted activity a child performs. Thus one should actually spank their child when the child performs an acitivty they want them to perform more often.

I've had enough of trolling for one night chaps. This question has been answered. Bananaman.

Monkey - not sure i understand your comment. I am not saying my idea is new at all. But the approach is unique enough to be the most widely available one. But I'm doing this for my own sake to understand ANN instead of the BNN that I deal with everyday. As far as that little paperclip - fuck that little bastard if he comes around here again I'll bend that fucking tip like a god damn twig. hate that little punk.