First people need to realize that Star Trek and Star Wars will never happen. We already now so far that every planet that we encountered outside of solar system is barren or gas like not suitable for any carbon based life form. Every mission that will be launched in near future will be focused to strip resources from our solar system. And if some poor sods will be launched for colonizing some asteroid they will be just miners. Not mentioning human body would never survive such acceleration and any theory about dampeners is bullcrap since it doesnt work in universe that way.
So to answer to your question yes you would be faster then radio signal. The further you would get the older messages you would hear but when you would be close to light speed you would stop hearing them becouse you would stop existing.
If you want to know how our future will look like imagine warhammer 40k hive cities just without the fantasy beings and warp travel.
OT: Radios
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
RE: OT: Radios
Some Physicists have speculated that some form of faster than light travel may be possible, but we can't generate anywhere near the energy necessary to make any of the ideas work. There is the possibility that we may be able to some day. It will likely be a while though (on the order of centuries most likely).
As far as the search for planets in other solar systems, we have only just started looking in the last few years and we have just scratched the surface. Additionally, the sort of planets we're looking for, approximately Earth size, with an atmosphere that isn't too thick or too thin within the "Goldilock's Zone" is one of the tougher types of planets to find. Gas giants are much easier to find.
Kepler 22b is the best found so far, though it's about the size of Neptune. It does have an atmosphere and an average mean temperature of 72 F (about 20 C). The size rules it out as a likely candidate to have life like us, but it met some of the criteria. We also can't be sure that life somewhat different than ours lives on planets further out from their sun with thicker atmospheres, or live underwater on water worlds with an ice cap over the whole planet like Europa has (the moon of Jupiter).
I'm also not so sure that the world is going to end up over crowded. We're pushing the carrying capacity of the world's food growing capabilities now. We're managing, but some years of bad grain crops in the main grain exporting countries sent the price of grain worldwide off the peg. The impact in the developing world was heavy. The Arab Spring was fueled in part by people mad at the high cost of food in economies that have no room for more expensive food.
India and China are right now keeping their people fed by mining their ground water. China has already exhausted most of their shallow aquifers and are working on the deepest water they can recover to grow crops. India is only a few years behind them in the use of their ground water. Estimates are by 2020, those two countries will not have enough water to grow their crops. What will happen when 2.5 billion more people are buying grain on the international markets?
It will be terrible, but I expect the world's population is going to drop sharply when that happens. It won't be pleasant. The developed countries that can grow enough to feed themselves will fare the best, but we'll all get some impact.
Personally I think the long term carrying capacity of the Earth's eco system is about 2-3 billion. If an ice age starts, that may drop to about 500 million. Those are just my back of an envelope guesses.
Anyway, that's a major tangent...
Bill
As far as the search for planets in other solar systems, we have only just started looking in the last few years and we have just scratched the surface. Additionally, the sort of planets we're looking for, approximately Earth size, with an atmosphere that isn't too thick or too thin within the "Goldilock's Zone" is one of the tougher types of planets to find. Gas giants are much easier to find.
Kepler 22b is the best found so far, though it's about the size of Neptune. It does have an atmosphere and an average mean temperature of 72 F (about 20 C). The size rules it out as a likely candidate to have life like us, but it met some of the criteria. We also can't be sure that life somewhat different than ours lives on planets further out from their sun with thicker atmospheres, or live underwater on water worlds with an ice cap over the whole planet like Europa has (the moon of Jupiter).
I'm also not so sure that the world is going to end up over crowded. We're pushing the carrying capacity of the world's food growing capabilities now. We're managing, but some years of bad grain crops in the main grain exporting countries sent the price of grain worldwide off the peg. The impact in the developing world was heavy. The Arab Spring was fueled in part by people mad at the high cost of food in economies that have no room for more expensive food.
India and China are right now keeping their people fed by mining their ground water. China has already exhausted most of their shallow aquifers and are working on the deepest water they can recover to grow crops. India is only a few years behind them in the use of their ground water. Estimates are by 2020, those two countries will not have enough water to grow their crops. What will happen when 2.5 billion more people are buying grain on the international markets?
It will be terrible, but I expect the world's population is going to drop sharply when that happens. It won't be pleasant. The developed countries that can grow enough to feed themselves will fare the best, but we'll all get some impact.
Personally I think the long term carrying capacity of the Earth's eco system is about 2-3 billion. If an ice age starts, that may drop to about 500 million. Those are just my back of an envelope guesses.
Anyway, that's a major tangent...
Bill
SCW Development Team
RE: OT: Radios
Yes, sadly, we won't be going anywhere beyond our solar system with manned spacecraft. As much as discovery of other planets intrigues and excites us.
Voyager 1 has been cruising at @60,000km/h for around 34 years and has gone 0.002 light years - our nearest star Proxima Centauri is around 4.2 light years away.
On rough scale, if the Sun was a beach ball, and the Earth a pea - 110metres away, Proxima Centauri would be around 32,000km away on scale.
Voyager 1 has been cruising at @60,000km/h for around 34 years and has gone 0.002 light years - our nearest star Proxima Centauri is around 4.2 light years away.
On rough scale, if the Sun was a beach ball, and the Earth a pea - 110metres away, Proxima Centauri would be around 32,000km away on scale.
RE: OT: Radios
ORIGINAL: wdolson
I'm also not so sure that the world is going to end up over crowded. We're pushing the carrying capacity of the world's food growing capabilities now. We're managing, but some years of bad grain crops in the main grain exporting countries sent the price of grain worldwide off the peg. The impact in the developing world was heavy. The Arab Spring was fueled in part by people mad at the high cost of food in economies that have no room for more expensive food.
India and China are right now keeping their people fed by mining their ground water. China has already exhausted most of their shallow aquifers and are working on the deepest water they can recover to grow crops. India is only a few years behind them in the use of their ground water. Estimates are by 2020, those two countries will not have enough water to grow their crops. What will happen when 2.5 billion more people are buying grain on the international markets?
It will be terrible, but I expect the world's population is going to drop sharply when that happens. It won't be pleasant. The developed countries that can grow enough to feed themselves will fare the best, but we'll all get some impact.
Personally I think the long term carrying capacity of the Earth's eco system is about 2-3 billion. If an ice age starts, that may drop to about 500 million. Those are just my back of an envelope guesses.
Anyway, that's a major tangent...
Bill
Great read Bill, thank you!
I´d just like to comment on your analysis of population developement and it´s implications.
It very much depends on what you define as "overcrowded".
If you define it as "more people than sutainable with current technology relying on
renewable ressources" it already is.
The problem with the scenario you describe is, that when prices for a ressource are increasing - not
because of increased production cost but because of increased demand and low availability - the attractiveness
to profit from the production of those ressources increases in direct proportion.
Now, the best way to increase production of mentioned ressources is to increase the area where those ressources
can be harvested. The only places left on earth where this expansion still is possible are the rainforests which
are responsible for a high percentage of oxygen production and CO² binding.
By reducing the area of rainforests we are at the same time reducing the sustainable number of people by renewable
ressources. We are, sadly, moving in a fast spinning devil´s circle fuelled by the global market and free economy.
Just hope my post is not interpreted as too political, just extending on your really interesting major tangent.
Best regards,
Lenny
RE: OT: Radios
These discussions refer to light traveling through a vacuum.
If your radio is traveling through a vacuum, you won't hear anything regardless of how fast it's traveling.
Has anyone heard anything lately about the Swiss experiment where the particle traveled faster than C? Last I heard some folks were pooh poohing the results.
- Phanatik
Ah.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/not-so-fast-second-experiment-refutes-faster-than-light-particles/2012/03/16/gIQAqYLkGS_story.html
If your radio is traveling through a vacuum, you won't hear anything regardless of how fast it's traveling.
Has anyone heard anything lately about the Swiss experiment where the particle traveled faster than C? Last I heard some folks were pooh poohing the results.
- Phanatik
Ah.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/not-so-fast-second-experiment-refutes-faster-than-light-particles/2012/03/16/gIQAqYLkGS_story.html
RE: OT: Radios
"I have difficulty to believe it, because nothing in Italy arrives ahead of time."
-Sergio Bertolucci, research director at CERN, on faster-than-light neutrinos
[;)]
I think you are referring to the Italian OPERA experiment indicating that under certain circumstances Neutrinos travel faster than C.
The results were always highly doubtable, and were refuted by two experiments with slightly different setups, M2K in Japan and Minos in
the United States.
As with most of those occurances, media made much more noise about the OPERA results than justified.
There always had been an extremely high chance that the error was not in our current understanding of Relativity (which would have come crashing
down on physics with a LOT of noise in case FTL Neutrinos turned out true), but withing the experimental setup of OPERA.
Nothing to see here, move along. [:D]
-Sergio Bertolucci, research director at CERN, on faster-than-light neutrinos
[;)]
I think you are referring to the Italian OPERA experiment indicating that under certain circumstances Neutrinos travel faster than C.
The results were always highly doubtable, and were refuted by two experiments with slightly different setups, M2K in Japan and Minos in
the United States.
As with most of those occurances, media made much more noise about the OPERA results than justified.
There always had been an extremely high chance that the error was not in our current understanding of Relativity (which would have come crashing
down on physics with a LOT of noise in case FTL Neutrinos turned out true), but withing the experimental setup of OPERA.
Nothing to see here, move along. [:D]
-
Bullwinkle58
- Posts: 11297
- Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm
RE: OT: Radios
ORIGINAL: zzodr
Yes, sadly, we won't be going anywhere beyond our solar system with manned spacecraft. As much as discovery of other planets intrigues and excites us.
Voyager 1 has been cruising at @60,000km/h for around 34 years and has gone 0.002 light years - our nearest star Proxima Centauri is around 4.2 light years away.
On rough scale, if the Sun was a beach ball, and the Earth a pea - 110metres away, Proxima Centauri would be around 32,000km away on scale.
You assume an initial boost and then coasting. A constant acceleration craft could go interstellar distances in much less itme, relativistic effects notwithstanding. There are several technologies in theoretical range of that, solar sails being one.
A great, now-old, juvenile novel about this is Heinlein's "Time for the Stars" about stellar exploration using constant-boost "torch ships" coupled with telepathic twins who are able to communicate outside relativistic norms. Outside the hard-science fun it's an interesting social commentary on what might happen between twins when one ages and the other essentially does not. The last chapter always made me think really hard when I was a kid reading these great books. Picture Magellan lost at sea for 500 years, and after sacrifice and great hardship is re-found and brought home on a 747 in an afternoon.
The Moose
RE: OT: Radios
ORIGINAL: Phanatik
These discussions refer to light traveling through a vacuum.
If your radio is traveling through a vacuum, you won't hear anything regardless of how fast it's traveling.
Has anyone heard anything lately about the Swiss experiment where the particle traveled faster than C? Last I heard some folks were pooh poohing the results.
Without some kind of radio receiver, you won't hear anything regardless of whether you are in an atmosphere or not. Radio waves travel and can be picked up just as easily in vacuum as in an atmosphere. Signals broadcast from vacuum to vacuum can potentially have less noise because there will be no atmospheric interference.
Earth communicates with unmanned craft in vacuum all the time with no problems.
Bill
SCW Development Team
RE: OT: Radios
ORIGINAL: LoBaron
Great read Bill, thank you!
I´d just like to comment on your analysis of population developement and it´s implications.
It very much depends on what you define as "overcrowded".
If you define it as "more people than sutainable with current technology relying on
renewable ressources" it already is.
The problem with the scenario you describe is, that when prices for a ressource are increasing - not
because of increased production cost but because of increased demand and low availability - the attractiveness
to profit from the production of those ressources increases in direct proportion.
Now, the best way to increase production of mentioned ressources is to increase the area where those ressources
can be harvested. The only places left on earth where this expansion still is possible are the rainforests which
are responsible for a high percentage of oxygen production and CO² binding.
By reducing the area of rainforests we are at the same time reducing the sustainable number of people by renewable
ressources. We are, sadly, moving in a fast spinning devil´s circle fuelled by the global market and free economy.
Just hope my post is not interpreted as too political, just extending on your really interesting major tangent.
Best regards,
Lenny
The rainforests have taken a hit because of population growth. The problem is the soil from the rainforest makes very poor farmland and gets depleted very quickly. Rainforests recycle the nutrients put into the soil from plant decay into the trees too quickly. The best farmland is ancient lake and river bottoms or some other place where nutrients were deposited, but not used very quickly.
Though former rainforests do have enough water if not too much, at least initially.
Bill
SCW Development Team
RE: OT: Radios
True...ORIGINAL: wdolson
ORIGINAL: Phanatik
These discussions refer to light traveling through a vacuum.
If your radio is traveling through a vacuum, you won't hear anything regardless of how fast it's traveling.
Has anyone heard anything lately about the Swiss experiment where the particle traveled faster than C? Last I heard some folks were pooh poohing the results.
Without some kind of radio receiver, you won't hear anything regardless of whether you are in an atmosphere or not. Radio waves travel and can be picked up just as easily in vacuum as in an atmosphere. Signals broadcast from vacuum to vacuum can potentially have less noise because there will be no atmospheric interference.
Earth communicates with unmanned craft in vacuum all the time with no problems.
Bill
But the discussion originated with a radio.
RE: OT: Radios
ORIGINAL: armin
First people need to realize that Star Trek and Star Wars will never happen. We already now so far that every planet that we encountered outside of solar system is barren or gas like not suitable for any carbon based life form. Every mission that will be launched in near future will be focused to strip resources from our solar system. And if some poor sods will be launched for colonizing some asteroid they will be just miners. Not mentioning human body would never survive such acceleration and any theory about dampeners is bullcrap since it doesnt work in universe that way.
So to answer to your question yes you would be faster then radio signal. The further you would get the older messages you would hear but when you would be close to light speed you would stop hearing them becouse you would stop existing.
If you want to know how our future will look like imagine warhammer 40k hive cities just without the fantasy beings and warp travel.
so your saying that Red Dwarf got it right.
Bummer man. Especially if you've read the book.
-
packerpete
- Posts: 129
- Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 3:10 pm
RE: OT: Radios
Do your headlights on your space Civic emit light? Or do they suck darkness??
RE: OT: Radios
As to space travel, didn't Einstein say that to propel an ant to the speed of light, it'd take engines as massive as the earth to get it that fast but it won't be to the speed of light or faster than it but just short of it?
-
danlongman
- Posts: 584
- Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 8:36 pm
- Location: Over the hills and far away
RE: OT: Radios
If there were radio transmissions originating on your ship or the Space Civic beside you doing the same speed you would receive them. At light speed any transmission from behind you
couldn't catch you. The signals from sources laterally separated would be wierdly distorted. I do not know about the signals from sources ahead of you closing speed would in fact be 300000 km/sec + 300000 km/sec exceeding "c".
Regardless there will always be punks driving around in the middle of the night in space with their stereos set to 11 blasting out hiphopcrap. And if you stopped suddenly all the signals from behind you would arrive at once and
your Tivo would blow up killing all aboard....the Tori Spelling radiation from 90210 alone would do it.
couldn't catch you. The signals from sources laterally separated would be wierdly distorted. I do not know about the signals from sources ahead of you closing speed would in fact be 300000 km/sec + 300000 km/sec exceeding "c".
Regardless there will always be punks driving around in the middle of the night in space with their stereos set to 11 blasting out hiphopcrap. And if you stopped suddenly all the signals from behind you would arrive at once and
your Tivo would blow up killing all aboard....the Tori Spelling radiation from 90210 alone would do it.
"Patriotism: Your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." - George Bernard Shaw
-
geofflambert
- Posts: 14887
- Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 2:18 pm
- Location: St. Louis
RE: OT: Radios
If I missed someone saying so, if you are traveling near the speed of light and the radio transmitter were moving at the same speed and same direction either in front of you or behind you, there would be no doppler shift so you would hear your Slim Whitman or whatever it is you listen to just fine. [:D]
On the OT, I believe we are in the early stages of an extiction event on the scale of the end of the Permian period. I pretty much agree with wdolson's estimate but I usually just say 1 billion. Besides a new ice age (which actually began about a thousand years back{don't quote me on that, I'm forgetting when exactly the current ice age cycle began, I might be way off as in much longer ago}) extreme drought over much of what is now arable land caused by the climate disturbance would also lower the limit. I'm afraid about 90% of all life from all the Kingdoms of life will disappear, and our own species will go extinct earlier rather than later. Al Gore is an optimist, I think the damage is already done and the outcome irreversible now. Our only chance would be if someone can figure out how to remove vast quantities of carbon dioxide and methane from the upper reaches of our atmosphere. If it could be done I'd guess the cost would be something like a million times what the Apollo Moon program cost, and the Congress will never pay for that. Sorry to be such a downer.
On the OT, I believe we are in the early stages of an extiction event on the scale of the end of the Permian period. I pretty much agree with wdolson's estimate but I usually just say 1 billion. Besides a new ice age (which actually began about a thousand years back{don't quote me on that, I'm forgetting when exactly the current ice age cycle began, I might be way off as in much longer ago}) extreme drought over much of what is now arable land caused by the climate disturbance would also lower the limit. I'm afraid about 90% of all life from all the Kingdoms of life will disappear, and our own species will go extinct earlier rather than later. Al Gore is an optimist, I think the damage is already done and the outcome irreversible now. Our only chance would be if someone can figure out how to remove vast quantities of carbon dioxide and methane from the upper reaches of our atmosphere. If it could be done I'd guess the cost would be something like a million times what the Apollo Moon program cost, and the Congress will never pay for that. Sorry to be such a downer.
-
Treetop64
- Posts: 933
- Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 4:20 am
- Location: 519 Redwood City - BASE (Hex 218, 70)
RE: OT: Radios
ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin
Absolutely.ORIGINAL: Nikademus
If a man talks in a forest and there's no woman around to hear him.....is he still wrong?
(my fav.) [:D]
The GF constantly accuses me of wrongdoing. Curiously, the things she accuses me of are exactly the same sort of things she does. I try to argue back about this.
I lose ever time.
I just don't get it...
RE: OT: Radios
You know the old saying....."Don't do as I do......DO AS I SAY!!!"
ah....the GF/Sig. Other "Double Standard" Never ever point it out. A couch will be in your immediate future.
ah....the GF/Sig. Other "Double Standard" Never ever point it out. A couch will be in your immediate future.
RE: OT: Radios
You will hear one song, repeated endlessly: "Drop Kick Me Jesus Through The Goal Posts of Life."
Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.
Didn't we have this conversation already?
Didn't we have this conversation already?
-
Treetop64
- Posts: 933
- Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 4:20 am
- Location: 519 Redwood City - BASE (Hex 218, 70)
RE: OT: Radios
ORIGINAL: Nikademus
You know the old saying....."Don't do as I do......DO AS I SAY!!!"
ah....the GF/Sig. Other "Double Standard" Never ever point it out. A couch will be in your immediate future.
It was last night.
RE: OT: Radios
Good comparision to Perm, I agree with your asessment although I rate one significant difference to that
event more important than you obviousely.
The Perm extinction event lacked a lifeform able to think ahead, to develop tools from complex plans, and
to know fear of things not physically present. The chance I see in our time is, considering we are quite a bunch
of people continuousely communicating ofe bilogically huge distances, information is passed on fast enough
to built up a resistance against global destruction.
It is improbably that in Perm something comparable existed, at least not on a globally dominant scale as humanity
is. There are dangerous times ahead and I am sure we as a race need above capability to the utmost to prevent a similar
desaster.
event more important than you obviousely.
The Perm extinction event lacked a lifeform able to think ahead, to develop tools from complex plans, and
to know fear of things not physically present. The chance I see in our time is, considering we are quite a bunch
of people continuousely communicating ofe bilogically huge distances, information is passed on fast enough
to built up a resistance against global destruction.
It is improbably that in Perm something comparable existed, at least not on a globally dominant scale as humanity
is. There are dangerous times ahead and I am sure we as a race need above capability to the utmost to prevent a similar
desaster.