EdEarl

On second thought, only a primary mirror is necessary. But, holding shape of mirror is a challenge.

Above your edit box are icons for "Paste," "Paste as Plain Text," and "Paste from Word." The latter may help when you paste.

That one buys energy in KWh is confusing, because 1 KWh is 100 watts of power used for 10 hours (i.e., watt hours), 10 watts for 100 hours, or 1000 watts for an hour, etc. But, sometimes people say 1000 watts per hour (a colloquial use of per) instead of 1000 watts for an hour. However, the word per means divide by not multiplied by in scientific circles.

Electronic devices generally have an optimal operating voltage, a maximum safe voltage, and a minimum operating voltage. Most devices will only use as much amperage as they require as long as the voltage supply is within minimum and maximum limits, which means you do not need to worry about too much current (usually--almost always). Converting DC (direct current) voltage to a higher or lower voltage is more complex than converting AC (alternating current). To convert alternating current requires a transformer. To convert DC requires the DC be changed into AC, a transformer, and the AC changed again to DC. A transformer should be matched for both voltage and current, and the same is true for a DC to DC converter. The DC to DC converter I described above is electronic. It is also possible to do the same job with a DC motor driving a DC generator.

Wow. Please forgive me for causing you any frustration or anger. I am concerned; otherwise, I would not have replied. My nature is, my wife tells me, not very empathetic. Moreover, discussions on this forum too often digress into name calling, and moderators frequently warn people who become too emotional, and sometimes people are banned for improper language. Thus, we practice responding to facts rather than personalities. While I am concerned about man made pandemics, there are other possible catastrophes that may cause the downfall of humanity and possible mass extinction of life on Earth, including, but not limited to, nuclear war, global warming, environmental pillage, and a massive meteor. I have focused on global warming as my cause. I hope you do well with yours.

2. and 3. are statements defining mgh, which is OK, one may define terms. I do not see anything illogical with your statements.

It is a good read, A Separate Reality, and its anthropologist author enjoyed some financial success along with controversy about whether or not the book is non-fiction. Physics is the same for all of us, within the bounds of relativity. Otherwise, physics experiments would not be repeatable by anyone, and the scientific method would not work.

1. is correct except t is the change in time between p1 and p2 and the word impulse is not relevant (does not affect the equation). It is basically the impulse momentum equation (i.e., [math]F\Delta t = \Delta p [/math])

You are welcome.

These recent posts seem to be going around the universe without discussing evolution on earth. I, too, do not understand your point(s) karsh.

No and no. There is nothing magic about a ball point pen. They use ink sparingly, and do take a long time to run out. You aren't crazy for making this observation. That you asked the question shows courage and curiosity. It also shows that you have not studied much science, but you can change that.

I cannot answer all your questions. One can change from one unit to another, for example you could convert joules to ergs. There is a conversion calculator, see: http://www.onlineconversion.com/ However, that does not change the value of h. I do not understand why you want the exponent to be positive. The units j*s is not dependent on dimensions, it is energy*seconds, unless you mean time as a dimension. Where did 6.62606957(29)×10+25 j*s come from? It is not the value of h. I do not understand what point you are trying to make. Work and energy are not the same. Forward and reverse work do not mean anything to me. And, what relevance are "+1 and -1 = 0 squared?" I hope someone else will discuss the things in your post that I do not understand and the hidden variable theory. I believe it is not widely accepted theory today.

Oh, the airborne bacteria seem to be extremophiles, which might escape into space. Common bacteria on the surface of the earth have much less chance of escaping into space. I didn't intend to say extremophiles might thrive in space. Perhaps bacteria settling on an asteroid is not relevant to their survival, IDK. But, it seemed a bit of ice and rock would make spores safer, by protecting them from some radiation and a bit of moisture to keep them from drying. Maybe the ice wouldn't provide moisture, if it heated from getting close to the Sun (or a star) it would sublimate. My knowledge of biology is, obviously, meager. True, abiogenesis must have occurred somewhere. And, panspermia seems unlikely ATM. If airborne bacteria can be shown able to readily escape earth, panspermia is more likely, but still seems unlikely because without a rocket interstellar travel is almost unimaginable.

ty spores. Metabolism in space is not essential for panspermia, only long term survival. IMO abiogenesis is more likely to be the source of life on Earth than panspermia, but there is no reason to exclude any possibility ATM.

Perhaps not, but if someone can think of a way airborne bacteria can be blown into space (maybe by solar wind), it would be worth looking in asteroids for bacteria.

Force can me measured in Newtons: 1 N = 1 kg·m/s2 Assume a 1 g mass travels 1 m/s and is stopped in 10-9s. F=ma = 1g * 1m/s / 109s = 109g·m/s2 = 106kg·m/s2 = 1,000,000 N (unless I made an arithmetic error) Yes, the mass and velocity of the moving object make an important difference to the force created on impact. But the force can be mediated with crush structures as found in modern automobiles, because they make the crash occur over a longer period of time.

True, but some bacteria can become dormant in a state called myxospores, in which they are more resistant to the environment. And, the oldest living bacteria is more than half a million years old, in permafrost. Could myxospores of a long living bacteria can survive long enough to encounter a wet asteroid, and then how long might they survive?

F=ma See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newtonian_mechanics#Forces.3B_Newton.27s_second_law The force depends on how quickly the crash occurs. Crashing a steel ball into a thick steel plate creates more force than crashing a sponge (same mass as steel ball) into a steel plate, because the sponge doesn't stop instantly, rather a little at a time. Even steel has some elasticity and does not stop instantly.

From: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/06/130620142954.htm It's worth saying again. Science is better than Sci-Fi or,

Is it possible that airborne microbes have escaped Earth and are floating in space?

The oldest rocks found so far are about 3.5 GYr old. We will not find older fossils unless we find older rocks. The only places older rocks may be found is places unknown, which probably means under the ocean or under ice. Does anyone know whether there are places on earth where older rocks may be found?

It seems that wherever we look, life is present. From: http://www.nature.com/news/high-flying-bacteria-spark-interest-in-possible-climate-effects-1.12310 Will we find life on asteroids and comets?

Start with https://www.khanacademy.org/ "learn" computer science lessons. There are many many resources on-line, you only need the patience and drive to learn. There are free computer languages for you to download, and all the documentation you need. Good luck. Ask questions here anytime, but there are other places to ask, too.

On the origins of cells: a hypothesis for the evolutionary transitions from abiotic geochemistry to chemoautotrophic prokaryotes, and from prokaryotes to nucleated cells by William Martin and Michael J Russell proposes that Chemosynthesis makes oxygen. From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemosynthesis Oxygen combines with iron to make iron oxide (in prehistoric oceans), that we mine today to make iron and steel. The source of that oxygen is attributed to photosynthesis by microorganisms that made stromatoliths that are now fossils from about 3.5 Gyr ago. From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron#Occurrence Fossil stromatoliths and iron ore deposits are evidence of earliest life AFAIK. However, if Martin and Russell are right, the deep ocean may hide additional evidence, perhaps earlier evidence. What is the chance of earlier evidence? Is there already earlier evidence. Is there more evidence of earliest life than fossil stromatoliths and iron ore deposits?

Light puts pressure on the mirror, which your rocket must overcome, reducing efficiency. If you make both your primary and secondary mirrors with holes in the middle, you may be able to concentrate light on a circle on the outside of the engine and direct its exhaust through the mirror holes. Thus, combining light pressure on the primary mirror and engine exhaust to increase efficiency. The secondary mirror may be larger and more massive, which may offset the added efficiency. The mirror shapes are more difficult to design and may to difficult to build. My vision is a very short focal length with only two mirrors. Perhaps clever engineering can reduce total mass to near that of a three mirror system. The mirror math is beyond my capability.