Zolar V

Ha. At the first sign of trouble the administration is already under attack. it seems like there were some people with agendas lying in wait for some ammo to attack. But to go back to the original issue, i would suspect that if the military or a security measure that was the same as the military's were implemented there would be NO terrorist attacks on airplanes anymore. or at least pretty close to none. As for the body scanners, i just don't see why anyone would have a problem with it. its not like its a full color "I am seeing you naked through a hole in the wall while you take a shower" kind of naked. + who cares about being a full anatomical model. If anything i feel bad for the guy who has to sit behind the desk and go "there is a penis, there is a pocket, there is a penis, there is a boob, there is a pen, there is a boob, there is a bomb, there is a knife, there is a penis. OMG A BOMB" must be so mundane.

Get AVG free, if it is any sort of virus or malware it will catch it.

Who says that the above is humor?

Oh I don't suppose i should explain my self. Morals and such were initiated into our thought process by our religion, even those who proclaim themselves atheist still believe in these guidelines set by religious teachings. the simplest example would be to compare American morals with those of African tribes, or Indian morals. a removed example would be comparing what Americans eat compared to what Indians eat, then replicate that model to morals.

for the same reason why we believe morals. The question on whether or not intelligent life exists elsewhere is an easy one to answer. i would say yes, and you could make some mathematical models and these would statistically say yes as well.

It seems to me that the question of "why are humans unique" seems to me to stem from a original concept that religion taught us. That is that we are in fact unique or different form other things to begin with. Hence i said previously that this question seems to stem from a religious concept. Or it may not actually be a religious concept, however it could have been incorporated into our religions due to religion and religious centers to also be your scholarly and schooled peoples. Whatever the case may be, I don't believe that We as Humans are so unique or different from any other animal. I believe that we are unique for being human in the same way a squirrel is unique against any other creature. In short I have to say probably. There is some characteristic that humans possess in the same probability that squirrels or dolphins have a characteristic that is unique to them. I do wonder though, if we were to give other animals a longer time to evolve would they begin to question their origins the same way we question ours? If an animals brain or rather communication parts of the brain were as big as ours would they not use or evolve the same amount and variety of communication skills we possess?

you seem to be misinterpreting my post, i did not try in anyway to bring this convorsation into religion, nor did i attack this post with religion. when i stated what seperates a duck from a squirrel i am referring to how is are they different, then compare that model with a human and a goose or a rhino or a chiwawa. language is inherently NOT a human unique trait, most if not all animals communicate in some form or another. Ants communicate via scent trails and vibrations, bee's use scent trails and dancing. Bears use vocal communications, body language and scent. I really dont see how our communication is Unique against other species. If anything i would think that our nonusage of Scent communication techniques makes us slightly underdeveloped compaired to the other animals. Of course this list does not take into account all animals nor does it take into account animals of other Kingdoms such as amphibions or aquatic animals. Your example of brain damage can easily be refuted by damaging the communication centers of an animal's brain and reintroducing it to a colony or some similar type action. But like i said before, Humans really are not unique in any way, we are just like any other animal subjected to evolution and its rules in accordance with the all seeing-governing factor, Time.

Hm, it seems you might have some misconseptions about radar. its is quite nearly impossible to use it for what you say due to both velocities of the object and the planet and its transmission power loss over distance. For instance a 1kw Radar signal might reach flight level 10.. or 10,000ft and bounce back to the station. by the time it gets there it is around .001w total power and you have to factor in the time and doppler effect. i do have a question tho, why would the sun annialhate? if you have our sun (a relativly light density star with a high gravitational field-and realy hot) and had a collision with a planet that is relativly heavy in comparison but the same size, the gravitational field is greater than the suns but is also cold-traveling at extreem velocity. would your sun and planet smash each other but then due to the gravitational fields and the impact would it not smash, lets say the sun and a piece of the sun stays and the planet while the rest of the sun folows the planet and altering its trajectory. depending on the velocity would it not follow an eliptical trajectory and slowly rebuild the sun in the center of the solar system? i have seen a similar thing happen to 2 galaxies, where the star slowly crashed into another star and eventually merged.

You know what is semi interesting, there is a general consensus that if there was to ever be a deepspace spacecraft, aka one traveling between solarsystems and beyond, that it would be spherical in nature and have a slow steady application of thrust. but however the spherical idea is fundimentally flawed due to intersteller stuff left over from star and solarsystem formation and the damage done by collisions with the particles. If such a collision were to occur wouldnt we just end up as asteriods/comets/meteores to other worlds? Interesting thought that some of the comets/asteroids/meteors that we have seen could be the byproduct of such collisions. There is a much deeper discussion in my thread in speculations called "Deepspace spacecraft" or something of that ilk.

I have wondered this myself many times and i came up with quite a simplistic answer that has proven true; we are not different period. If you follow evolution then we are just the product of time, our actions are dictated by instinct in the same way any other animal is. You ask what seperates humans from animal, i say what seperates a squirrel from a rabbit. I really dont see any differences between us and any other creature, However it would seem to me that the foundation of this question is actually based in religion. I say this because it was religion that taut us that we are different that we are better. If you take religion out of the question you find that we are just another species that evolved to inhabit our niche in the world. No, we are not the ultimate goal of evolution we are just another point on it. We are still evolving, you could lead an example of this by looking at our species in the medieval age as compared to our present age. we evolved from sticks and stones to steel and plastic. From what i can see our next step in evolution is "cyberization", as in human integration with computer technology. If we did the research our brain could adapt to a new form of information processing. I discussed this topic in my thread "Cyberization", I could easily continue the topic, but no one wants to play ball Anyways i rave, to answer the question- What makes us the ultimate goal? what makes us NOW the endpoint of evolution? is there not more time? if there is then is there not more evolution that we have not experienced? Thank you, I hope that answered your question in as much detail as you need.

not nessasarily, if i were to go out on a limb here and think about possible usefull applications. I would have to think that this would be a good concept on another plantet that has a bit less gravity and little to no landmass on the planets surface. imagine Stargate Atlantis but the city in air instead of the water, due to the practicality of having it off the ground/water. thinking of a reason why, maybe the craft has multiple stories and has multiple docking bays for planitary vehicles. the reason why it would have planitary vehicles is because there are more than one floating islands. but thats just another thought. You know in another 100 or 200 years we will have a need for some things similar to these..... just saying..

but it would be a really really cool little measly airstrip.. IN AIR.

yea i read it and i understand what you are trying to convey. i agree with what you are saying, i was just having a thought. there is so much energy potential within a nuclear fission reaction, that it seems odd we cannot increase energy output and decrease size.

huh, it seems to me that the potential for smaller reactors and increased energy output is there but the technology is not. if we were to try to get this type of thing off the ground (no pun intended) then we would have an industry supporting nuclear research. if we had an industry then the technology would exponentially get better, supposedly. of course i do not know all of the physics and equations that coencide with nuclear engins, but i have memorized several different working reactor designs and analyzed them. and after analyzing there does seem to be the potential to increase power output and decrease size, as stated above. but this is all just hypothesis, cuz im just a highschool grad bidding my time for college.

Huh, i dont think i ever actually introduced myself, all that 1 year ago. My name is Michael and i now work in the usaf. The easiest way to describe my personality and thougths through out a day is 'visionairy'. completely unrealistic visionairy. I absolutely love learning new things, in the fields of Science and History, not so much english as words dont fully convey meaning due to their lack of color.

who is miss informed? i already know the iter hasnt been build, however they have broken ground in france

i realize that with fusion reactors (been folowing it for a few years.. COMMON ITER!) So no little cool looking thermonuclear reactor for my model? .... damn i cant find the sad face icon

true, but for the real floating island i would just use nuclear, i would not bother with deuterium. however this is supposed to be a model. so my thought process was "think of a light isotope, decide if it is exothermic and self sustaining, use it small scale as a representation o fthe large scale. and hope it provides atleast some power to the model it self. Battery backup my be needed" ^my thought process, i came up wiht deuterium, for a light isotope, and my question here was is it exothermic and self sustaining. since then i dont think anyone has actually answered my question at all. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedhuh... missed the rtg link post..reading it now

heh, i read thos same articles a few years back. i never was able to find the reason why those projects were cancled in the late 60's. the most i could come up with was the end of the cold war and the nuclear bill signed by ?kennedy? prohibiting and inhibiting much if not all nuclear research for quite a while. honestly i really dont see any reason as to why we have not made nuclear powered aircraft yet. or used nuclear power in any sort of vehicle. it seems to me that despite the radiation it is quite usefull. and if we were to have industries allowed to build/research/maintian/operate such things then our level of understanding on nuclear engines would increase, along with our nuclear technology. from what i have seen in the past, it usually takes industry to advance tehcnology as opposed to research doen by non-enterprising people.

i really dont think i should be saying this, but just to prove my point, during survival school we were specifically told that you cannot live on food alone, and insects are the only food item that has enough moisture in iteslf to digest without deyhydrating the person. if you really think they are wrong.. then.... you can change the 60 years of their proven survival techniques.

OHNOEEES!!! blargh blarhg!! (death qualms) lkdfjlashglsdhaghsadhgdsla;hg bleughhhhhh

thanks for the tips, those are what i was looking for but why does it have to be a lighter than air vehical? i imagined mine as a massive heavy object being held up by 4-8-16-20 some giant turbo engines, situated vertically in the island, powered by a nuclear reactor. The nuclear reactor takes care of any energy concerns and allowes for flight longevity. i would think using this, the craft could infact stay afloat for quite a while. why would any boarding aircraft have have the ability to hover to land? if the island went stationairy and had a 15000 foot runway then a plane could easily land on it using the same types of procedures already designed to land on ground based landing strips.

hmm what a nice break down and logical thought process on the above described situation. honestly its quite similar to my own break down.

and im not disagreeing with you, rather you just proved my point. i did not say anything about removing the sweat factor or respiration when saying you do not get enough moisture from food alone. quite the contrary i do believe. of course i never said anything regarding the normal daily activities, but rather that should have been assumed. if anyone is currently being assinine it would be you sir, for taking the material out of context.

i dont need energy density to be able to force the island to float. all i need is a constant power input, energy density could be maintained via capacitors.