Total Posts:45|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

nothing is possible

sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2012 10:40:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I have had many discussions about the "Anything is possible in Physics". I contend that nothing is possible outside of your reality as you see it right now there is no other reality, so therefore nothing is possible. Simply just saying something is possible or that there is alternate realities is incoherent babble. It may be sufficient to get schmucks to fund ridiculously expensive go nowhere research that produces nothing. But in the end man will never know anything outside of this solar system other than color enhanced pictures from telescopes. Man will never fugue out the origin of the universe man will never know how life started he will never answer an of the big questions, not now not ever. It is a total waste of resources, building a better mouse trap is a better use of resources.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2012 3:07:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I'm a little confused. Nothing is possible? It isn't possible that we could, say, send a man to Mars?

That's some forward-thinking right there, especially considering we may be on the verge of discovering faster-than-light particles...

Wondering about what could be possible has been the driving factor behind many, if not most of the advances we have made.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2012 3:09:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/22/2012 10:40:28 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have had many discussions about the "Anything is possible in Physics". I contend that nothing is possible outside of your reality as you see it right now there is no other reality, so therefore nothing is possible. Simply just saying something is possible or that there is alternate realities is incoherent babble. It may be sufficient to get schmucks to fund ridiculously expensive go nowhere research that produces nothing. But in the end man will never know anything outside of this solar system other than color enhanced pictures from telescopes. Man will never fugue out the origin of the universe man will never know how life started he will never answer an of the big questions, not now not ever. It is a total waste of resources, building a better mouse trap is a better use of resources.

The claim is a juxtaposition between accepted human capacity and eventual human advancement.

You know, like, going from being confined to walking to flying; being confined to speaking with only the people you live proximally to immediate verbal access to anyone across the world; travelling years to waiting moments to see someone's face from another country... that sort of thing.

So, by those standards, anything is possible -- or, the advancements of tomorrow are not confined by the rules you impose on the reality that exists today.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2012 3:52:55 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Don't let the quantum woo confuse you, nothing is impossible.

By that, I mean... NOTHING is impossible.

Not to be confused with everything being possible. Why yes, if that was the case, according to the quantum reality of things, I could have just shat out a perfectly intact chocolate muffin with bacon sprinkles.

Egocentric New Agerz buy into this stuff. Pyramid power,man. Magic crystals and sacral chakrah.

Magic is real though. Magic is the manipulation, control, or exploitation of belief. With magic, it is possible to get people to believe that you sawed a smokin' hot babe in half, that you saved them 50% or more on their car insurance, or that a man 2,000 years ago walked on water, healed the sick, and died for your sins so that you may have a chance at living forever.

Magic is pretty scary bidnus, but it is what runs the world.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2012 12:34:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/23/2012 3:52:55 AM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Don't let the quantum woo confuse you, nothing is impossible.

By that, I mean... NOTHING is impossible.

Not to be confused with everything being possible. Why yes, if that was the case, according to the quantum reality of things, I could have just shat out a perfectly intact chocolate muffin with bacon sprinkles.

Egocentric New Agerz buy into this stuff. Pyramid power,man. Magic crystals and sacral chakrah.

Magic is real though. Magic is the manipulation, control, or exploitation of belief. With magic, it is possible to get people to believe that you sawed a smokin' hot babe in half, that you saved them 50% or more on their car insurance, or that a man 2,000 years ago walked on water, healed the sick, and died for your sins so that you may have a chance at living forever.

Magic is pretty scary bidnus, but it is what runs the world.

Lol, you mean social manipulation?

On that note -- I've always said that the difference between physicists and the professors at Hogwarts si the overall understanding of the natural world.

Magic is what we attribute to an act that we don't understand, and which we previously though improbable or impossible.

Go back to 1750 and whip out any techie gadget from today, and chances are you wil be written as a powerful sorcerer for the rest of history.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2012 12:45:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
This is what magic is and always was.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
joneszj
Posts: 1,202
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2012 4:50:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/23/2012 3:52:55 AM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Don't let the quantum woo confuse you, nothing is impossible.

By that, I mean... NOTHING is impossible.

Not to be confused with everything being possible. Why yes, if that was the case, according to the quantum reality of things, I could have just shat out a perfectly intact chocolate muffin with bacon sprinkles.

Egocentric New Agerz buy into this stuff. Pyramid power,man. Magic crystals and sacral chakrah.

Magic is real though. Magic is the manipulation, control, or exploitation of belief. With magic, it is possible to get people to believe that you sawed a smokin' hot babe in half, that you saved them 50% or more on their car insurance, or that a man 2,000 years ago walked on water, healed the sick, and died for your sins so that you may have a chance at living forever.

Magic is pretty scary bidnus, but it is what runs the world.

To say " 'nothing' is impossible" is to give the attribute of impossibility to nothing which would not make it 'nothing' but 'something' with the attribute of impossibility. It would be more proper to say "nothing isn't".

....trolling :P but I did hear this at one time and thought it was kewl.
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2012 5:17:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
An interesting quantumn explanation of time travel deals with the 'anything is possible' argument.

Take the grandfather paradox. Treating then universe as a wave function, you just cannot kill your grandfather before you were born. This means that any other possible variatioon of the collapsed quantum waveform will happen first. This would include the mundane, such as tripping on the way into the time machine and dying of a haemorrhage, all the way to the weird. For exAmple all the atoms of air in then room moving to, and staying at the left hand side of the room, leaving you to die of vacuums exposure.
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2012 10:57:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/23/2012 3:07:44 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
I'm a little confused. Nothing is possible? It isn't possible that we could, say, send a man to Mars?

That's some forward-thinking right there, especially considering we may be on the verge of discovering faster-than-light particles...

Wondering about what could be possible has been the driving factor behind many, if not most of the advances we have made.

"It isn't possible that we could, say, send a man to Mars?"

No it isn't, it isn't ever going to happen. The trip is unsurvivable. They might try but it will never succeed. There are to many Murphy's laws involved. The human heart will atrophy and fail in zero gravity. To build something big enough to create artificial gravity wont withstand the g forces involved. Then it will be bombarded with micro meteors which will rip it to shreds. A micro meteor the size of a marble traveling at 20,000 miles an hour has the destructive force of a bolder 10 feet in diameter. Then lets not forget the radiation in space that they will be exposed to. Not just the trip there but the trip back. Then of course everyone will go crazy sitting confined in the same place for 4 years. And last but not least, there is nothing there, we already know this for a fact. It's a dead lifeless planet with nothing to offer the human race. Why bother wasting so much money on something that will produce nothing and fail anyway. Any attempt at Mars will just be a coffin in space for who ever is stupid enough to go.

Even if man were able to travel at the speed of light it would still not be fast enough for space exploration. To even consider space exploration slower than the speed of light is just plain imbecilic hogwash reserved for day dreaming academia.

I see nothing wrong though with conducting research in low earth orbit in a weightless environment to build better mouse traps that will benefit "all of man" in the here and the now.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2012 11:06:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/24/2012 10:57:22 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 1/23/2012 3:07:44 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
I'm a little confused. Nothing is possible? It isn't possible that we could, say, send a man to Mars?

That's some forward-thinking right there, especially considering we may be on the verge of discovering faster-than-light particles...

Wondering about what could be possible has been the driving factor behind many, if not most of the advances we have made.

"It isn't possible that we could, say, send a man to Mars?"

No it isn't, it isn't ever going to happen. The trip is unsurvivable. They might try but it will never succeed. There are to many Murphy's laws involved. The human heart will atrophy and fail in zero gravity. To build something big enough to create artificial gravity wont withstand the g forces involved. Then it will be bombarded with micro meteors which will rip it to shreds. A micro meteor the size of a marble traveling at 20,000 miles an hour has the destructive force of a bolder 10 feet in diameter. Then lets not forget the radiation in space that they will be exposed to. Not just the trip there but the trip back. Then of course everyone will go crazy sitting confined in the same place for 4 years. And last but not least, there is nothing there, we already know this for a fact. It's a dead lifeless planet with nothing to offer the human race. Why bother wasting so much money on something that will produce nothing and fail anyway. Any attempt at Mars will just be a coffin in space for who ever is stupid enough to go.

Even if man were able to travel at the speed of light it would still not be fast enough for space exploration. To even consider space exploration slower than the speed of light is just plain imbecilic hogwash reserved for day dreaming academia.

I see nothing wrong though with conducting research in low earth orbit in a weightless environment to build better mouse traps that will benefit "all of man" in the here and the now.

It's only dumb luck that space probes and satellites aren't destroyed by micro meteors. I would bet that some have but we have never been told for fear of jeopardizing funding.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2012 12:14:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
nothing is possible:

this is self refuting.... for the statement it self was possible.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Brain_crazy
Posts: 242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/1/2012 11:03:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/24/2012 10:57:22 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 1/23/2012 3:07:44 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
I'm a little confused. Nothing is possible? It isn't possible that we could, say, send a man to Mars?

That's some forward-thinking right there, especially considering we may be on the verge of discovering faster-than-light particles...

Wondering about what could be possible has been the driving factor behind many, if not most of the advances we have made.

"It isn't possible that we could, say, send a man to Mars?"

No it isn't, it isn't ever going to happen. The trip is unsurvivable. They might try but it will never succeed. There are to many Murphy's laws involved. The human heart will atrophy and fail in zero gravity. To build something big enough to create artificial gravity wont withstand the g forces involved. Then it will be bombarded with micro meteors which will rip it to shreds. A micro meteor the size of a marble traveling at 20,000 miles an hour has the destructive force of a bolder 10 feet in diameter. Then lets not forget the radiation in space that they will be exposed to. Not just the trip there but the trip back. Then of course everyone will go crazy sitting confined in the same place for 4 years. And last but not least, there is nothing there, we already know this for a fact. It's a dead lifeless planet with nothing to offer the human race. Why bother wasting so much money on something that will produce nothing and fail anyway. Any attempt at Mars will just be a coffin in space for who ever is stupid enough to go.

Even if man were able to travel at the speed of light it would still not be fast enough for space exploration. To even consider space exploration slower than the speed of light is just plain imbecilic hogwash reserved for day dreaming academia.

I see nothing wrong though with conducting research in low earth orbit in a weightless environment to build better mouse traps that will benefit "all of man" in the here and the now.

Yaaa I can pretty well guarantee you'll be proven wrong
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2012 7:34:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/1/2012 11:03:20 PM, Brain_crazy wrote:
At 1/24/2012 10:57:22 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 1/23/2012 3:07:44 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
I'm a little confused. Nothing is possible? It isn't possible that we could, say, send a man to Mars?

That's some forward-thinking right there, especially considering we may be on the verge of discovering faster-than-light particles...

Wondering about what could be possible has been the driving factor behind many, if not most of the advances we have made.

"It isn't possible that we could, say, send a man to Mars?"

No it isn't, it isn't ever going to happen. The trip is unsurvivable. They might try but it will never succeed. There are to many Murphy's laws involved. The human heart will atrophy and fail in zero gravity. To build something big enough to create artificial gravity wont withstand the g forces involved. Then it will be bombarded with micro meteors which will rip it to shreds. A micro meteor the size of a marble traveling at 20,000 miles an hour has the destructive force of a bolder 10 feet in diameter. Then lets not forget the radiation in space that they will be exposed to. Not just the trip there but the trip back. Then of course everyone will go crazy sitting confined in the same place for 4 years. And last but not least, there is nothing there, we already know this for a fact. It's a dead lifeless planet with nothing to offer the human race. Why bother wasting so much money on something that will produce nothing and fail anyway. Any attempt at Mars will just be a coffin in space for who ever is stupid enough to go.

Even if man were able to travel at the speed of light it would still not be fast enough for space exploration. To even consider space exploration slower than the speed of light is just plain imbecilic hogwash reserved for day dreaming academia.

I see nothing wrong though with conducting research in low earth orbit in a weightless environment to build better mouse traps that will benefit "all of man" in the here and the now.

Yaaa I can pretty well guarantee you'll be proven wrong

How do you figure? There is no money in case you hadn't noticed. The country is 15 trillion in debt. We have moved from a capitalist country to a nanny state so now we have to pay cradle to grave benefits to every loser in this country. I have already pointed out the infeasibility and unsurvivabity. You offer nothing to even suggest we are even close to a trip to Mars other than, wouldn't that be "neato". No I am afraid you will be proven wrong. All of the evidence suggests it. Just saying it is possible is in no way a step closer.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2012 7:36:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
My heads hurts...
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2012 7:48:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
History shows that things that were considered impossible at the time are possible now?

How could you back that claim up Sadolite in light of that?

How could you possibly know the limitations of technology for the unknown future?
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2012 8:18:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/2/2012 7:48:49 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
History shows that things that were considered impossible at the time are possible now?

How could you back that claim up Sadolite in light of that?

How could you possibly know the limitations of technology for the unknown future?

;) ...... right so they show that things were possible....
not that impossible is possible..

Even God cannot do the impossible or real Miricals per say .. for whatever he did, it would only be the possible. So it is impossible to say god can do the impossible, if this is true that only make god, impossible.. .. ;)_
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2012 3:10:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/2/2012 8:18:21 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:

Even God cannot do the impossible or real Miricals per say .. for whatever he did, it would only be the possible. So it is impossible to say god can do the impossible, if this is true that only make god, impossible.. .. ;)_

It all depends on how you define miracles and impossibility. If miracles are simply phenomena that escape explanation, then real miracles are possible.

One could strictly define impossibility as those things that are contradictory; then if your god was limited the possible, then he could only do the possible. However, if your god is not bound by the rules of logic then he could do the impossible as well!
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2012 8:27:04 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/3/2012 3:10:25 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
At 2/2/2012 8:18:21 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:

Even God cannot do the impossible or real Miricals per say .. for whatever he did, it would only be the possible. So it is impossible to say god can do the impossible, if this is true that only make god, impossible.. .. ;)_

It all depends on how you define miracles and impossibility. If miracles are simply phenomena that escape explanation, then real miracles are possible.

One could strictly define impossibility as those things that are contradictory; then if your god was limited the possible, then he could only do the possible. However, if your god is not bound by the rules of logic then he could do the impossible as well!

anything that depends on definition is can be possible. what with these extreme relativsm . a contradition is (A&~A) something and its exact opposite at the same time.. 1-1=0 its never relative..

if you are defining it some other way then you are speaking about something else. impossible is the negation of possible there is not relative to definions about it.

Its these are all analyitic defintions. Lastly if logic is false. then it is false logic. It mean there was a mistake in the logic. YOu can just run around talking about breaking logic on a whim. the term has become loose because of the prestige. which causes to many people to claim it, thus destorting its original intentional meaning and use. that is people who get proven wrong will speak against it. and other want to use the name for thier advantage. So its general meaning becomes corrupted.

If miracles are simply phenomena that escape explanation, then real miracles are possible.

The Fool: you might as well say impossible because if they are unexplanable you we would know anything that happend. for it would all appear random. so you must understand something .. I sense a forced compatablity with a popular explanation. what was going on. No self existing thing depends on the definition. e.g I have book here I can define is as bird like and churping but that irrelavent of what it actuall is.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2012 6:06:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/12/2012 8:27:04 AM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
anything that depends on definition is can be possible. what with these extreme relativsm . a contradition is (A&~A) something and its exact opposite at the same time.. 1-1=0 its never relative..
I guess you didn't read the part about NOT BOUND BY THE RULES OF LOGIC.

if you are defining it some other way then you are speaking about something else. impossible is the negation of possible there is not relative to definions about it.
See above.

Its these are all analyitic defintions. Lastly if logic is false. then it is false logic. It mean there was a mistake in the logic.
See above.

You can just run around talking about breaking logic on a whim.
People do it all the time! Heck, go to nut house and you'll see it rampant!

the term has become loose because of the prestige. which causes to many people to claim it, thus destorting its original intentional meaning and use. that is people who get proven wrong will speak against it. and other want to use the name for thier advantage. So its general meaning becomes corrupted.
You missed the whole point.

If miracles are simply phenomena that escape explanation, then real miracles are possible.
Thanks for repeating what I said.

The Fool: you might as well say impossible because if they are unexplanable you we would know anything that happend. for it would all appear random. so you must understand something .. I sense a forced compatablity with a popular explanation. what was going on. No self existing thing depends on the definition. e.g I have book here I can define is as bird like and churping but that irrelavent of what it actuall is.
Semantics.

I am sure you have heard the question: "Can God make a rock so heavy that He cannot lift it?" If you answer yes or no, then you are limiting God's abilities and thus He is not omnipotent...However, another answer is that God can only do what is possible and thus it is not possible that there can exist a rock that He cannot lift. So, God cannot make such a rock because such a rock is not possible and omnipotence means the ability to do all that's possible.

The above is a God bound by logic. If He were NOT bound by logic, then He could make a rock so heavy that He can and cannot lift it.
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/14/2012 1:14:19 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Because they were feasible and of this world. A trip to mars is unsurvivable. The odds of failure are 99.999% You would have a better chance of riding and elephant while at the same time picking the winning power ball numbers in every state that offers a power ball lottery and winning them all, than man making it to mars and back. We have not progressed one iota since 1969 since man went to the moon. That was feasible it was close and only took a few days. We still use rockets. What a joke. Space exploration using rockets, Ya right. I will repeat Even if we could travel at the speed of light that still wouldn't be fast enough to explore space, even if we could travel 100 times the speed of light that still wouldn't be fast enough. A trip to mars is an utter and complete waste of time and resources. There is nothing there. We already know this. What would be the point. To see if a few people can live in a tin can for 4 years? We can do that now. What will they bring back? A pile of useless dirt that only the privileged few will get to see and have. No thanks my tax dollars are better spent elsewhere.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/14/2012 9:46:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/14/2012 1:14:19 AM, sadolite wrote:
Because they were feasible and of this world. A trip to mars is unsurvivable. The odds of failure are 99.999% You would have a better chance of riding and elephant while at the same time picking the winning power ball numbers in every state that offers a power ball lottery and winning them all, than man making it to mars and back.
That's simply not so. We've already sent & landed probes many times. It is a technologically feasible endeavor. It is more a question of protecting the astronauts from radiation. This is perhaps the most difficult part.

We have not progressed one iota since 1969 since man went to the moon.
I think we've progressed quite a bit since 1969!

That was feasible it was close and only took a few days. We still use rockets. What a joke. Space exploration using rockets, Ya right. I will repeat Even if we could travel at the speed of light that still wouldn't be fast enough to explore space, even if we could travel 100 times the speed of light that still wouldn't be fast enough.
It would still be useful to explore what we can within and around our solar system. Much knowledge and technology can be developed from this.

A trip to mars is an utter and complete waste of time and resources. There is nothing there. We already know this. What would be the point.
I guess you would have been against going to the moon too. What a shame.

To see if a few people can live in a tin can for 4 years? We can do that now. What will they bring back? A pile of useless dirt that only the privileged few will get to see and have. No thanks my tax dollars are better spent elsewhere.
The amount of technology that gets spun off from space programs is ridiculously large! I won't argue that we may need to cut back now during economic hardship but we definitely need to explore space!

Just think, if we're ever able to warp space-time then we may be able to go quite far. Remember, we are discovering new planets daily.
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2012 12:06:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/14/2012 9:46:18 AM, tBoonePickens wrote:
At 2/14/2012 1:14:19 AM, sadolite wrote:
Because they were feasible and of this world. A trip to mars is unsurvivable. The odds of failure are 99.999% You would have a better chance of riding and elephant while at the same time picking the winning power ball numbers in every state that offers a power ball lottery and winning them all, than man making it to mars and back.
That's simply not so. We've already sent & landed probes many times. It is a technologically feasible endeavor. It is more a question of protecting the astronauts from radiation. This is perhaps the most difficult part.We've already sent & landed probes many times.

A probe does not need air and food and water. It has no feelings, it is an inanimate object. It requires nothing in they way of any of the aformantioned. It does not "feel" The people will go insane and their hearts will atrophy and go into cardiac arrest
before they even get there let alone back.

We have not progressed one iota since 1969 since man went to the moon.
I think we've progressed quite a bit since 1969!

That was feasible it was close and only took a few days. We still use rockets. What a joke. Space exploration using rockets, Ya right. I will repeat Even if we could travel at the speed of light that still wouldn't be fast enough to explore space, even if we could travel 100 times the speed of light that still wouldn't be fast enough.
It would still be useful to explore what we can within and around our solar system. Much knowledge and technology can be developed from this.

A trip to mars is an utter and complete waste of time and resources. There is nothing there. We already know this. What would be the point.
I guess you would have been against going to the moon too. What a shame.

To see if a few people can live in a tin can for 4 years? We can do that now. What will they bring back? A pile of useless dirt that only the privileged few will get to see and have. No thanks my tax dollars are better spent elsewhere.
The amount of technology that gets spun off from space programs is ridiculously large! I won't argue that we may need to cut back now during economic hardship but we definitely need to explore space!

Just think, if we're ever able to warp space-time then we may be able to go quite far. Remember, we are discovering new planets daily.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2012 12:20:32 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/16/2012 12:06:56 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 2/14/2012 9:46:18 AM, tBoonePickens wrote:
At 2/14/2012 1:14:19 AM, sadolite wrote:
Because they were feasible and of this world. A trip to mars is unsurvivable. The odds of failure are 99.999% You would have a better chance of riding and elephant while at the same time picking the winning power ball numbers in every state that offers a power ball lottery and winning them all, than man making it to mars and back.
That's simply not so. We've already sent & landed probes many times. It is a technologically feasible endeavor. It is more a question of protecting the astronauts from radiation. This is perhaps the most difficult part.We've already sent & landed probes many times.

A probe does not need air and food and water. It has no feelings, it is an inanimate object. It requires nothing in they way of any of the aformantioned. It does not "feel" The people will go insane and their hearts will atrophy and go into cardiac arrest

The point was that its a challenge that needs to be overcome, but If you can send probes to mars, there's no reason to suspect that the next challenge, sending a human to mars, is itself impossible. Especially If we think not in the near future, but in the far future, it is very well possible.

before they even get there let alone back.

We have not progressed one iota since 1969 since man went to the moon.
I think we've progressed quite a bit since 1969!

That was feasible it was close and only took a few days. We still use rockets. What a joke. Space exploration using rockets, Ya right. I will repeat Even if we could travel at the speed of light that still wouldn't be fast enough to explore space, even if we could travel 100 times the speed of light that still wouldn't be fast enough.
It would still be useful to explore what we can within and around our solar system. Much knowledge and technology can be developed from this.

A trip to mars is an utter and complete waste of time and resources. There is nothing there. We already know this. What would be the point.
I guess you would have been against going to the moon too. What a shame.

To see if a few people can live in a tin can for 4 years? We can do that now. What will they bring back? A pile of useless dirt that only the privileged few will get to see and have. No thanks my tax dollars are better spent elsewhere.
The amount of technology that gets spun off from space programs is ridiculously large! I won't argue that we may need to cut back now during economic hardship but we definitely need to explore space!

Just think, if we're ever able to warp space-time then we may be able to go quite far. Remember, we are discovering new planets daily.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2012 4:52:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/16/2012 12:06:56 AM, sadolite wrote:
A probe does not need air and food and water. It has no feelings, it is an inanimate object. It requires nothing in they way of any of the aformantioned.
We can bring air, food, and water.

It does not "feel" The people will go insane and their hearts will atrophy and go into cardiac arrest before they even get there let alone back.
You select people that can handle the trip. There's much research on this point and it is not as difficult to accomplish as you suggest. Also, the astronauts will need to do exercise to maintain proper physical shape for the journey. Much of this is done for astronauts that have stayed on the space station for quite long periods of time.

Again:
We've progressed TONS since 1969!

It would still be useful to explore what we can within and around our solar system. Much knowledge and technology can be developed from this.

I guess you are against us having gone to the moon, right?.

The amount of technology that gets spun off from space programs is ridiculously vast.

If we're ever able to warp space-time then we may be able to go quite far. Remember, we are discovering new planets daily.
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2012 8:47:59 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/16/2012 4:52:20 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
At 2/16/2012 12:06:56 AM, sadolite wrote:
A probe does not need air and food and water. It has no feelings, it is an inanimate object. It requires nothing in they way of any of the aformantioned.
We can bring air, food, and water.

It does not "feel" The people will go insane and their hearts will atrophy and go into cardiac arrest before they even get there let alone back.
You select people that can handle the trip. There's much research on this point and it is not as difficult to accomplish as you suggest. Also, the astronauts will need to do exercise to maintain proper physical shape for the journey. Much of this is done for astronauts that have stayed on the space station for quite long periods of time.

Again:
We've progressed TONS since 1969!

It would still be useful to explore what we can within and around our solar system. Much knowledge and technology can be developed from this.

I guess you are against us having gone to the moon, right?.

The amount of technology that gets spun off from space programs is ridiculously vast.

If we're ever able to warp space-time then we may be able to go quite far. Remember, we are discovering new planets daily.

Again:
We've progressed TONS since 1969!

Um, no we haven't. We still use 60 year old technology to get something into space. Then once it reaches low earth orbit, it's out of fuel. And again what would be the point in space travel using such rudimentary technology. We already know Mars has nothing to offer. Like you said we sent probes and it is a dead waste land. Why would we go in the distant future? There still will be nothing there. You never address the human heart issue. It will atrophy in zero gravity. If one were to build a ship large enough to simulate gravity it would not be strong enough to deal with the G forces involved. And the whole idea that there are people that can live for years without any outside contact is the thing movies are made of. People in space stations start going wacko after just months, And that is with the knowledge that rescue is just days away. Time warp technology LOL. Thats just used by science to get gullablbe people like you to fork over good money after bad to fund their toys.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2012 8:59:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/23/2012 12:34:02 PM, Ren wrote:
At 1/23/2012 3:52:55 AM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Don't let the quantum woo confuse you, nothing is impossible.

By that, I mean... NOTHING is impossible.

Not to be confused with everything being possible. Why yes, if that was the case, according to the quantum reality of things, I could have just shat out a perfectly intact chocolate muffin with bacon sprinkles.

Egocentric New Agerz buy into this stuff. Pyramid power,man. Magic crystals and sacral chakrah.

Magic is real though. Magic is the manipulation, control, or exploitation of belief. With magic, it is possible to get people to believe that you sawed a smokin' hot babe in half, that you saved them 50% or more on their car insurance, or that a man 2,000 years ago walked on water, healed the sick, and died for your sins so that you may have a chance at living forever.

Magic is pretty scary bidnus, but it is what runs the world.

Lol, you mean social manipulation?

On that note -- I've always said that the difference between physicists and the professors at Hogwarts si the overall understanding of the natural world.

Magic is what we attribute to an act that we don't understand, and which we previously though improbable or impossible.

Go back to 1750 and whip out any techie gadget from today, and chances are you wil be written as a powerful sorcerer for the rest of history.

That reminds me of Clarke's third "law:"

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2012 3:07:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
: At 2/18/2012 8:47:59 AM, sadolite wrote:
Again:
We've progressed TONS since 1969!
: Um, no we haven't. We still use 60 year old technology to get something into space.
Last I checked, we used to use the space shuttle to get into space. That technology wasn't available in 1969. Neither were the types of rockets we have today.

Then once it reaches low earth orbit, it's out of fuel. And again what would be the point in space travel using such rudimentary technology.
Right, so it's all or nothing: either we go to space on the Enterprise or we stay here on Earth. Forget about walking or crawling, I ain't getting outta my crib till I can run! Now that's human progress!

: We already know Mars has nothing to offer. Like you said we sent probes and it is a dead waste land. Why would we go in the distant future? There still will be nothing there.
As far as we know, there's nothing anywhere else either so I guess we should just stay here. Brilliant!

: You never address the human heart issue. It will atrophy in zero gravity.
I guess you didn't bother reading my posts. Perhaps you don't bother with reading because reading is ridiculously ancient; we've got the same old reading for 5000 years. I bet you're waiting for telepathy to come around.

Don't forget to tell Sergei Krikalyov who was 803 days (2.2 years) in space that his heart has atrophied and that he is dead. I mean telepath it to him.

: If one were to build a ship large enough to simulate gravity it would not be strong enough to deal with the G forces involved. And the whole idea that there are people that can live for years without any outside contact is the thing movies are made of.
That might be so...if we needed to simulate gravity that intensely, but we don't. Oh, don't forget to tell Sergei that he went crazy before he died from a shrunken heart. Break it to him easily, because it's going to be news to him.

: People in space stations start going wacko after just months, And that is with the knowledge that rescue is just days away.
Yep. Nutty old Sergei!

: Time warp technology LOL. Thats just used by science to get gullablbe people like you to fork over good money after bad to fund their toys.
It was Gene Roddenberry that made it up and Einstein and Rosen just stole the idea and Alcubierre just went along with them. But I suppose you're waiting for teleportation so you can get out of bed.
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2012 5:34:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/20/2012 3:07:41 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
: At 2/18/2012 8:47:59 AM, sadolite wrote:
Again:
We've progressed TONS since 1969!
: Um, no we haven't. We still use 60 year old technology to get something into space.
Last I checked, we used to use the space shuttle to get into space. That technology wasn't available in 1969. Neither were the types of rockets we have today.

Then once it reaches low earth orbit, it's out of fuel. And again what would be the point in space travel using such rudimentary technology.
Right, so it's all or nothing: either we go to space on the Enterprise or we stay here on Earth. Forget about walking or crawling, I ain't getting outta my crib till I can run! Now that's human progress!

: We already know Mars has nothing to offer. Like you said we sent probes and it is a dead waste land. Why would we go in the distant future? There still will be nothing there.
As far as we know, there's nothing anywhere else either so I guess we should just stay here. Brilliant!

: You never address the human heart issue. It will atrophy in zero gravity.
I guess you didn't bother reading my posts. Perhaps you don't bother with reading because reading is ridiculously ancient; we've got the same old reading for 5000 years. I bet you're waiting for telepathy to come around.

Don't forget to tell Sergei Krikalyov who was 803 days (2.2 years) in space that his heart has atrophied and that he is dead. I mean telepath it to him.

: If one were to build a ship large enough to simulate gravity it would not be strong enough to deal with the G forces involved. And the whole idea that there are people that can live for years without any outside contact is the thing movies are made of.
That might be so...if we needed to simulate gravity that intensely, but we don't. Oh, don't forget to tell Sergei that he went crazy before he died from a shrunken heart. Break it to him easily, because it's going to be news to him.

: People in space stations start going wacko after just months, And that is with the knowledge that rescue is just days away.
Yep. Nutty old Sergei!

: Time warp technology LOL. Thats just used by science to get gullablbe people like you to fork over good money after bad to fund their toys.
It was Gene Roddenberry that made it up and Einstein and Rosen just stole the idea and Alcubierre just went along with them. But I suppose you're waiting for teleportation so you can get out of bed.

All of your responses are repugnant and without scientific merit with prolonged space travel. You don't seem to understand there is no rescue there is no possibility of hope if something goes wrong. You seem to think there is so you refer back to the past and short durations in space and chalk that up to success. A rocket is a rocket. I don't care if it uses liquid fuel or solid fuel they are equally useless for space travel. I don't care what kind of rocket you say is an advance It's just as useless as the Saturn five rocket from sixty years ago when it come to space travel. The friken shuttle is a glider with a rocket attached to it that's it nothing more. Gliders are 150 year old technology. Talk to me when you can travel "300" times the speed of light and I'll show some interest. Until then thinking about space travel using rockets shows a severe lack of what the educated elite call "Critical Thinking" To continue to develop "thrust" based technology and try to sell it as the future of space travel is a sham on the tax payer, Thrust based technology is for low earth orbit, that is it. It is obvious that thrust based technology is useless for distant travel. Anyone with a lick of common sense and intellectual honesty must come to that conclusion.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/21/2012 3:14:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
: At 2/20/2012 5:34:12 PM, sadolite wrote:
: All of your responses are repugnant and without scientific merit with prolonged space travel.
They're only repugnant to someone that's lacking intelligence. Fortunately, you are not what determines scientific merit. But, if anyone wishes to verify what I have posted they can.
http://science.nasa.gov...

You can look up Sergei Krikalyov's name as well so as to educate yourself about long missions in space. But then again, you know more than NASA and the rest of the space travel community.

: You don't seem to understand there is no rescue there is no possibility of hope if something goes wrong.
Can you show me where I have said that? Answer: nowhere.

: You seem to think there is so you refer back to the past and short durations in space and chalk that up to success. A rocket is a rocket. I don't care if it uses liquid fuel or solid fuel they are equally useless for space travel.
Your opinion doesn't matter; only the facts do. And the facts are that rockets have been and continue to be useful for space travel. Ironically, they have also been used to send probes to Mars.

: I don't care what kind of rocket you say is an advance It's just as useless as the Saturn five rocket from sixty years ago when it come to space travel. The friken shuttle is a glider with a rocket attached to it that's it nothing more. Gliders are 150 year old technology.
Your opinions don't matter; please stick to facts.

: Talk to me when you can travel "300" times the speed of light and I'll show some interest.
Yes. You don't get outta bed for less than 300c. Gotcha.

: Until then thinking about space travel using rockets shows a severe lack of what the educated elite call "Critical Thinking"
And clearly you are NOT part of the educated elite. Critical Thinking involves posting facts not cynical opinions.

: To continue to develop "thrust" based technology and try to sell it as the future of space travel is a sham on the tax payer, Thrust based technology is for low earth orbit, that is it. It is obvious that thrust based technology is useless for distant travel. Anyone with a lick of common sense and intellectual honesty must come to that conclusion.
Yeah, the wheel is so Bronze Age. I mean come to me when you have maglev cars...then I'll get outta bed! That's how children learn too: don't bother crawling or walking, only get outta bed once you can run!
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.