beecee

Just adding information for the reputable members of this forum. My criticism of your stupid statement stands.

Worth noting that Australia and New Zealand have now opened up a "travel bubble" and are looking to extend that to other countries where the virus has been reasonably controlled. eg: Fiji, Tonga.

That's a totally ignorant statement, more akin to the nonsense that the previous Idiot the US had for a President would babble on about. Had my first Astro jab...had my flu shot...wife has had her first...Son completed both jabs as he is in the catagory of "front line workers" Dumb and Dangerous as per Trump.

I probably align with both those conditions, thankfully I don't align with your condition.

Agreed: That would have the main journalists in the Australian editions of Sky News locked up.....

Yeah OK, I ignored [actually forgot] about refraction of light. The way I see it is that refraction is a change of direction due to differing densities of the medium, whereas the geodesical path of light, due to the curvature of spacetime caused by all the mass, is as we all know just that. Some of Bill's "statements of certainty" just seem way off and completely opposed to the verified data that we do have.

Funny, last night when I saw this question, was about to also describe the Earth as an oblate spheroid. I have never heard of the Hill sphere and after searching see it is tied in with the Roche limit. Clearly like you, I also misunderstood. Still, I have learnt something though!

You again misunderstand or are simply being obtuse? Light simply follows geodesics in curved spacetime. We interpret the curvature as gravity. Gravity is geometry. That's what the last 100 years of observational data and experiments is telling us and we have no reason to doubt that. Any density of gas, adds to the mass and along with the mass of the planet or whatever else the gas surrounds, will warp and/or curve the spacetime. We see that as gravity. Why are you seemingly making this sound so nonsensically complicated? In conclusion anything with mass [including gas] curves/warps the spacetime. We see that geometry as gravity. It's that simple. No. The original definition of gravity [Newtonian] was simply an attraction between two masses, falling off as the inverse square of the distance between them. It generally works fine. When relativistic speeds are approached or more accuracy is required we use GR, which so far aligns with all our data and gives the same results as Newtonian with that extra accuracy, which mostly is not needed. Your denial of these facts are unsupported rhetoric.

And in some cases that lack of logic and critical thinking could be the death of us.eg: Trump and his ignorant rantings with regards to vaccines.

Yes, 100%. Again, yes, 100% I don't know. Ask me again in a 1000 years. Yes, agreed, 100%

I doný really see major news corps as outright "lying"...Muddying the waters or extreme bias and ignoring and purposely misinterpreting of facts is another, and anyway or method of supporting their not so hidden agenda. I was witnessing this near everyday with Sky News, particularly with their bias reporting and seemingly fanatical interests in anything Joe Biden ever does, no matter how insignificant on their u tube platform. That of course can lead to conspiracy nonsense. I now ignore anything from Sky News. Where there is any uncertainty and/or fear, we more then likely will have some crazy conspiracy arise. Conspiracies can be dangerous to say the least, as is discussed in the following....https://goop.com/wellness/environmental-health-civics/why-people-believe-in-conspiracy-theories/ Others are just based on plain outright lies and dishonesty. eg; The denial of the Holocaust...the 9/11 government conspiracy, the denial of Apollo and the 6 Moon landings.

Did Chris set out to discover America? Did he even know America was there? How many died on that and his other trips to the new world, and while we are at it, how many died in any of the voyages taken by the old seafaring explorers? You see while you are certainly able to offer reasons why we should not attempt to put men on Mars, in time, and when it can be reasonably safe to do, it will be done. And space exploration will still continue further afield, even when tripping to Mars becomes an everyday concern. That's simply the nature of the beast and necessary to extend our use by date. Marc Millis: Aerospace Engineer NASA Glenn Research Center and https://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=1962 https://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=11493

Yes and it is and has achieved plenty. But you are simply overlooking the fact that mankind needs and will continue robust space exploration, when technology becomes available and a safe return is reasonable. It is part of our makeup and will lead to the extention of our race. As I said, since the ISS was habitable more then 20 years ago, we have had a presence in space every day over that period. Man and machine will continue our exploration beyond this Earth. Let me ask you a question. Your reasons for the non essential manned Mars missions are known...my question is, irrespective, do you believe we will or "should" go to Mars? Was it wrong to climb Mnt Everest? was Columbus wrong? "Should" we have gone to the Moon? I could be run over by a bus when I go for my early morning walk, or worse get taken by a shark when going for a surf. Your swivel chair could collapse under you causing an injury. Our robotic machines are doing a great job, and will continue to do a greater job when needed. Robotic exploration is needed...no one cheers louder then I do when Spirit, Opportunity, Phoenix, Curiosity and Persevernece made their highly successful and dangerous landings. They have and are doing a great job preparing the way for an eventual manned landing.Is that wrong in your eyes? We probably can but not safely. Once all the known problems that may kill or harm any potential astronaut is nullified, eliminated or minimalised, then and only then should we go. Our robotic craft will always do a great job preparing the way and exploring hand in hand with their creators, mankind. Yep, most certainly, which is why like the ISS, it should be an International effort. Again, as per my question to Ken, "should we go to Mars?" My answer, if we can do it safely and return them safely, then yes. It will certainly be a small step for mankind in helping to perhaps extend the species.

I won't comment too much on your thoughts other then to say I couldn't disagree more. As Prometheus said eloquently, "It's not pointless as it's done in the spirit of exploration and curiosity" While I quoted a line from sci/fi, let me say you will never stop humanity from exploring. Columbus showed we wouldn't fall of the edge of the Earth by his desire for exploration, curiosity and to go where [he thought] man had not gone before. There are of course countless and countless other examples. And sure we certainly need to fix how home [Earth] that goes without saying. Has there been any example of better International co-operation then that achieved through building the ISS? Worth noting that mankind/humankind has had a presence in space everyday for more then 20 years now because of the ISS. I will agree totally with you that automation and robots will always play a part, and be forerunners to those places before mankind, but you can bet your short n curlies, that humans will follow when conditions and safety are as compatible and as best as we can achieve. Again as Prometheus said, there are those amongst us who are willing to take the risk, and like Prometheus, I also cheer them on and wish them the best, whether its SpaceX, China, Russia or whoever. It will happen, and should happen. I just hope I'm still around to see it.

Disputing in preference of your personal belief is not science, or the scientific methodology. We see many examples of light following geodesics in curved spacetime, including examples of gravitational lensing by dark matter, as well as conglomerations of baryonic matter. And of course Eddington's observational data in 1919 during an eclipse, also supports the fact that light follows geodesics in curved spacetime. Your hypothetical also sounds a lot like the hypothetical that was posted a couple of days ago, thus....https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/124836-time-for-a-different-view-hypothesis/?tab=comments#comment-1174315 The theory on the transmission of light is I suggest beyond reproach at this time. If you have any evidence to the contrary, then post it. If that evidence is valid, we may see you in Stockholm in November.

Do you believe that plans and efforts to finally put a man/woman on Mars is uneccessary? Or are you only speaking of the current near time frame to do that in? The facts that we havn't been back to the Moon in near 40 years, may seem to support your opinion, but supports my suggestion that continued space exploration should be a world united effort. The eventual benefits will flow to all and as I personally believe, we/humanity are not meant to stagnate on this fart arse little blue orb, which does have a "use by date". If we can extend that date, we must. To quote Captain, [now Admiral Kirk] we must boldly go where no man has gone before..apologies if that sounds corny. 😊

While searching for the previously recommended video, I found the following discussions on the possible and probably likely explanation of many UFO's/UAP Nice little video worth watching.... https://www.metabunk.org/threads/pyramid-ufos-in-night-vision-footage-maybe-bokeh.11695/ and the following lengthy article particularly with relation to the USA....and entitled..."Adversary Drones Are Spying On The U.S. And The Pentagon Acts Like They're UFOs" at... https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...entagon-acts-like-theyre-ufos?utm_source=digg I'm in no position to really judge the veracity of the second article or the many links within that link, I'll let others do that...plus apologies if this is seen to be in the wrong thread....a kindly mod may chose to move to a more appropriate one if needed.

As a kid, I always loved the sci/fi movies, such as "The Day the Earth stood Still" among others. The cold war space race then had me enthralled...the sputniks, Gagarin's, Sheperd's and Glenns. I followed it relentlessly, obtaining all the news I could, culminating of course with Apollo. A fantastic TV series called "Cosmos" by Sagan, had me craving for more knowledge, then I read Hawking's "A Brief History of Time" and learnt more about the wonders of SR/GR and quantum mechanics and other physics applications with regards to light. Then I started on a now defunct science forum, which supplemented my learning greatly, more notable good reads, such as "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" and Kip Thorne's "Black Holes and Time Warps" among many others, and voila! here I am!!

Found this data from Wiki also.....https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Mars_program extracts: "The program includes fully reusable launch vehicles, human-rated spacecraft, on-orbit propellant tankers, rapid-turnaround launch/landing mounts, and local production of rocket fuel on Mars" " After landing on Mars, the spacecraft would be loaded with locally-produced propellants to return to Earth". His long term plans are the colonization of Mars..."SpaceX Mars program is a development program initiated by Elon Musk and SpaceX in order to facilitate the eventual colonization of Mars". "However, Musk has advocated since 2016 a larger set of long-term Mars settlement objectives, going far beyond what SpaceX projects to build; any successful colonization would ultimately involve many more economic actors—whether individuals, companies, or governments—to facilitate the growth of the human presence on Mars over many decades" When questioned in an interview he answered... "No. Your probability of dying on Mars is much higher than Earth. Really the ad for going to Mars would be like Shackleton’s ad for going to the Antarctic [in 1914]. It’s gonna be hard. There’s a good chance of death, going in a little can through deep space. You might land successfully. Once you land successfully, ... there's a good chance you'll die there. We think you can come back; but we're not sure." <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< The WIKI article on Musk and SpaceX is quite good and revealing as to his plans and methodology in achieving them...worth reading in full.

That is what is was planned by Mars One https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_One Just now found out that they have gone bust, actually a couple of years ago. I still understand that plans by NASA, SpaceX do include a return.

I wish Elon, SpaceX and/or any other orginization, all the best in achieving a manned Martian landing, and returning them safely, as soon as is humanly possible.

The speed of light is a constant and always travels at "c". It has no rest mass and is never seen to be stopped, only redshifted/blueshifted. Light simply follows geodesics in spacetime curvature, which at the EH of a BH, is such, that all paths lead towards the singularity as mentioned before. Even at a distance of 1.5 Schwarzchild radius from a BH, [that is 1.5 times its radius] light will be forced to travel in a circle, such that if you were orbiting at that co-ordinate, you would see the back of your head. This is called the photon sphere. We are of course speaking of the garden variety Schwarzchild BH. There are some examples, questions and answers in the previous link I gave that would be worth reading.

Anything with mass, [including Dark Matter] that creates spacetime curvature will cause gravitational lensing when in the appropriate positions.

The gravity/spacetime does not stop or slow light; The spacetime curvature in a BH is such, that all paths lead towards the singularity, and of course the escape velocity at the EH, exceeds "c". An analogy would be a fish representing light] trying to swim upstream at say 10kms/hr in a river flowing at 10 or more kms/hr. Light always follows geodesics in spacetime, hence gravitational lensing effects which are rather common. Analogies all have there limitations remember but this suffices to show why light cannot escape a BH. A more comprehesive explanation can be found here....https://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/insidebh/index.html https://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/insidebh/waterfall.html The spacetime continuim is a model or framework, against which we locate events and describe them in the familiar co-ordinates plus time. What you see as time, I may see as space, and vice versa, hence their connection. One cannot exist without the other. While the following is not a realistic example,but it explain what I probably am not explaining very well....In the Frame of reference of a photon, it would traverse the whole universe in an instant. Better still here..... https://www.physicsoftheuniverse.com/topics_relativity_spacetime.html#:~:text=Thus%2C space and time are,approaching the speed of light.

Some facts: Space and time are both variable quantities and two opposite sides of the same coin, so to speak...without space, there is no time, without time, there is no space. Gravity is simply spacetime geometry. Time dilation is caused by relative velocity or a difference in gravitational potential, in which a body is deeper within a gravity well then another higher up. Your hypothetical is invalidated by the twin paradox I think. [one twin remaining on Earth, the other moving away at a relative velocity] Both observe each others clocks to be going slow.