Jump to content

Moontanman

Senior Members
  • Posts

    12840
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    37

Everything posted by Moontanman

  1. Do you have a citation that supports that assertion? We have found so many planets already, and we can detect only a small percentage of planets skewed toward gas giants due to them being easier to find, and yet we find lots of small planets and more than a few that are in the sweet spot called the goldilocks zone. In fact current data seems to show the sweet spot is far larger than we at first suspected. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstellar_habitable_zone http://phl.upr.edu/projects/habitable-exoplanets-catalog
  2. If indeed you are talking about pressurized water reactors I would agree, but the are other safe options. The main problem with nuclear power on the moon would be building a reactor on the moon, materials would be difficult to get there, and radiating away waste heat. The waste heat problem could be a deal breaker actually..
  3. From your own link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter I see nothing to infer that nuking ourselves is the most likely answer. Actually the Fermi Paradox may very well be faulty due to the fact that we could not detect our own signal leakage at the distance of the nearest star. It is well known now that interstellar gas and dust masks all leakage type signals well before they can get to us. We do not routinely send out greetings at a power level that we could detect ourselves. There is also the idea that advanced cultures use power more efficiently as they become more advanced and are even less likely to be detected. Our own planet used to radiate far more leakage than it does now due to advances in technology that use radio waves more effectively. Military radar is the exception along with our efforts to radar map things like asteroids and we have detected signals suspiciously like this but such signals have not repeated, and we would not expect them to be repeated often enough to be seen, a prerequisite of our own SETI standards.
  4. At this point we have no idea what the great filter is or even if it is. The step from chemical evolution to biological evolution may well be the great filter and that is already behind us. Or the step between eukaryotic cells and prokaryotic cells could very well be the great filter as well. There is the step between unicellular and multicellular life as well... Personally I think religion is the great filter and we are pressing against it right now. It could be that intelligence itself is the problem. I see no reason to assume warfare will kill us all other than the fact that we have had more than one other civilization fail, none were are technologically advanced as we are to be sure, but civilizations rise and fall and then rise again. Rapa nui , I think, is the best example of what we are currently doing, but we have the power to garner resources those islanders did not so it remains to be seen if the proliferation of a dominate species destroying biodiversity is survivable. It could very well be that colonising space, Failure/Success, is the great filter due to us simply consuming ourselves out of house and home here on earth...
  5. Who says we are stopping the use of nuclear on Earth and what does that have to do with the moon? Besides the fact that we use 1940s nuclear tech and there are other more advanced ways to use nuclear that cannot explode or melt down? A Moon base near the poles makes sense due to the availability of ices and solar power. If nothing else near the poles you could have more than one solar power station and at least one would always be in sunlight all the time and the transmission cables would be short.
  6. Really? I can't even let myself comment further but you sir are clueless...
  7. Why not position the base at one of the Moon's Poles? Supposed to be water ice there and there are relatively large places that are sunlit all the time...
  8. Any chance you can back that assertion up with something other than your own baseless assertions?
  9. https://agu.confex.com/agu/fm15/webprogram/Paper81031.html http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/07/pluto-alive-where-heat-coming http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015AGUFM.P51A2044W I would appear that tidal heating and a possible geological recent impact are the two contenders at the moment...
  10. Actually everything I've read seems to indicate the gravitational flexing between Charon and Pluto is more than enough to explain the heating on not only Pluto but other small bodies orbiting larger ones. Radioactivity wouldn't be enough to cause basalt lavas on Pluto due to Pluto being so small it loses heat fast but it is more than enough to explain cryovolcanism. Radioactivity, some sources actually posit a five mile wide ball of uranium and thorium acting as a natural nuclear reactor at the Earth's core, explains heat on the Earth and Venus as well as Mars and Mercury. Venus has completely resurfaced itself in the last 500,000,000 years or so driven by internal heat from radioactivity and the leftover heat of accretion. The surface of Venus is covered by shield volcanos. You should also consider that the gas giants and ice giants still contain rock, metals and radioactive metals, more so than earth and they lose heat much more slowly than the Earth does. On Jupiter and Saturn Neon rain exchanges heat and creates heat from gravitational contraction as well as containing much or more radioactive elements than the Earth. As for Uranus and Neptune, they may externally look similar but the discrepancies in heat would, at least at first blush, indicate some significant differences we cannot see from the outside at this time. Ceres still puzzles some but recent impacts could explain the localised cryovolcanism...
  11. I killed a mammal with my bare hands two days ago, it was very unpleasant and left me feeling really... depressed for some reason. Killing large crayfish, physically tearing them apart so the small fish can eat them bothers me not at all... Something I'll have to give some thought to...
  12. Yes this is true, as can you evidently... Again your insinuations of some sort of conspiracy depressing these findings has pretty much destroyed any credibility you might have with me...
  13. I appreciate your citations, some of them do not seem to have anything to do with hydrogen but others do so. Your claims of some sort of conspiracy against hydrogen therapy does not lend any credibility to your claims. Some of the claims are really just wrong, hydrogen infused water would by definition be at least mildly acidic not alkaline. I also failed to see any human trials. There are some sources that indicate this is a scam... http://www.skepticblog.org/2009/01/05/water-snakeoil/
  14. May I inquire as to where you live and have never heard of Star Trek? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek
  15. The whole idea of not paying for birth control is smoke and mirrors to cover up religious control and or persecution. Insurance with birth control is cheaper or exactly the same as health insurance without birth control. In fact I have had insurance providers (friends who worked at them) say that most of the time birth control must be written out of most plans to prevent it from being covered not added. Not to mention that health insurance with birth control is actually cheaper. Any argument that claims to worry about costs is either dishonest or ignorant of the facts. No one would want to exclude birth control for costs, it's strictly people imposing their religious beliefs on others...
  16. Can you cite any of those peer reviewed articles?
  17. Do you have any scientific evidence of what you claim from a neutral source?
  18. Using religious"freedom" as an excuse to implement your religious beliefs on others is not religious "freedom" it is religious "persecution". http://www.phillyvoice.com/trevor-noah-drags-pro-life-pennsylvania-rep-who-urged-mistress-to-get-an-abortion/ It would be funny if this attitude of do as I say not as a do wasn't so serious and used to persecute people. I have little doubt there are people who oppose abortion, I do, but taking steps to force my views on others is quite unconstitutional. It's a backdoor method for people to persecute others. Not being allowed to persecute others over religion is not an infringement on religious freedom. It makes very little business sense to not provide birth control if you are providing health insurance to your employees. This unholy union of religion and politics called the republican party is IMHO unconstitutional. The idea of religious freedom trumping reality is one of the major problems in our society today. From parents letting their children die because they don't believe in medical care to the slimy con artists who get fabulously wealthy off the hopes and fears of the poor this attitude of "religious freedom" has been distorted out of shape. This distortion is not accidental, it is actually a real political power play being played out by christian dominionists . Their goals and methods have been known for decades but no one really thought this tactic would work. But religion, basically being the dishonest quest for power over others, has used this strategy to garner support from normally "reasonable" theists due to the general idea of "if it's god's work it has to be good" Few mainstream christians are willing to speak out against this perversion of our laws for fear of persecution themselves and the biblical idea of judge not lest ye be judged. It a very effective and powerful scam mostly because questioning the christian religion is difficult for other christians, when a christian leader is found out to be committing some crime the idea of forgiveness reigns over justice in many christian communities. I personally know of christian leaders, locally, who have been caught doing everything from child molestation to theft of church money and the congregations made it almost impossible to prosecute these crimes. The Problem these people have with birth control is that is allows sexual congress with no consequences, it is especially loathsome for women to be sexually active and not suffer the consequences of pregnancy and the biblically decreed pain and suffering of sexual activity.
  19. My bad I was trying to compare the energy of neutrinos with the energy of photons being emitted. If you could collect the energy being given off in neutrinos would it compare to what a solar panel collects..
  20. A significant number of humans are born intersexed, neither male not female and possesing genitalia parts from both sexes. How does your friend dismiss this?
  21. There are some theoretical possibilities from a quark star to a preon star. It would appear there is a official possibility. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N6946-BH1
  22. The best thing to do is go to an exit and put an exhaust fan. The fan will allow fire fighters to enter the building and fight the fire with much less water and put it out from the bottom instead of putting water on top of it... I used to work for DuPont, we had a fire brigade, it was part of a training program that sucking out or blowing in, the hot gases and following the fire to it's source with water will put it out far faster. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ventilation_(firefighting)
  23. https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/102592208660177072021/photos/photo/111273953323011908818/6469085285026238210 A gif, I couldn't get it to display..
  24. Detonating a moderate sized nuke in low earth orbit above the USA would be catastrophic...
  25. Somewhere many years ago I saw a study of doing this to the mouth of chesapeake bay, I'm not sure how big the bomb was but it generated a tsunami that pretty much wiped out everything in and hear the bay. Yes, A fusion bomb could very well be orders of magnitude bigger than a fission bomb. http://www.nucleardarkness.org/include/nucleardarkness//images/high_yield_vs_low_yield_4_bombs_750.jpg Actually if "rocket man" was serious about dealing a real blow to the entire US without killing anyone directly with a moderately large device he is on the verge of being able to do it. Anyone want to guess what that would be?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.