OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours - VMS

This is a discussion on OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours - VMS ; On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:50:23 -0700, John Santos wrote: > Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: >> In article , m.kraemer@gsi.de >> (Michael Kraemer) writes: >>> In article , helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de >>> (Phillip >>> Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes: >>> ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 181

Thread: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

  1. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:50:23 -0700, John Santos wrote:

    > Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:
    >> In article , m.kraemer@gsi.de
    >> (Michael Kraemer) writes:
    >>> In article , helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de
    >>> (Phillip
    >>> Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:
    >>>
    >>>> Just yesterday, I saw a report on television about a heavy-ion
    >>>> accelerator being used to treat tumors. This is a modern example of a
    >>>> "practical use" for something which came out of basic research.
    >>>
    >>> That was "nano" with the contribution on HIT, right ?

    >> Right.
    >>
    >>> I happen to have contributed to that development (and still do).
    >>> But this is not such a good example, since it did not drop
    >>> out of a big expensive experiment by chance.
    >>> In fact it has roots in the simple energy loss formula by Bethe & Co
    >>> (1930s), the idea by Wilson (1940s) to use
    >>> the proton Bragg peak for radiotherapy and a single curve by Barendsen
    >>> showing higher cell killing efficiency of heavier ions (1960s).
    >>> Since then it was hard, very directed work to put together the pieces
    >>> of the puzzle which eventually led to this new type of radiotherapy.

    >> By "modern" I meant that the setup in "nano" was modern. In
    >> contrast, traditional X-ray machines haven't changed much in decades
    >> (though at least where I have mine done, there is no longer film in the
    >> cartridge, but rather some detector, presumably similar to a CCD---huge
    >> advantage in that the images can be seen right away), though of course
    >> there have been advances in CT etc.
    >>

    >
    > The "modern" X-ray tube, still used in most X-ray machines, was
    > developed about 100 years ago by William D. Coolidge who
    > worked for General Electric. To get this back on topic, Coolidge
    > was born in Hudson Massachusetts, home of the infamous DEC Fab.
    >
    > Closer to home, my grandfather bought his house from Coolidge's
    > father in the early 1920's, and my dad was born there. I'm not
    > sure if this was the Coolidge family home, or just a 2nd house
    > they owned. The Coolidges still lived across the street when I
    > was a kid. (William Coolidge died at age 101 in 1975, but I'm
    > pretty sure he didn't live there, though he was probably born in one
    > of the two houses, either my grandparents' house or the one across
    > the street.) This also puts me at 3 or 4 degrees of separation
    > from Thomas Edison. Not quite as cool as being descended from one
    > of the Lumiere brothers, but close ;-) (Hi, Didier, if you're still
    > reading c.o.v.)
    >


    Was Coolidge Corner in Brookline named after him?


    --
    PL/I for OpenVMS
    www.kednos.com

  2. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    Tom Linden wrote:
    > On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:50:23 -0700, John Santos wrote:
    >
    >> Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:
    >>
    >>> In article , m.kraemer@gsi.de
    >>> (Michael Kraemer) writes:
    >>>
    >>>> In article ,
    >>>> helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip
    >>>> Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Just yesterday, I saw a report on television about a heavy-ion
    >>>>> accelerator being used to treat tumors. This is a modern example of a
    >>>>> "practical use" for something which came out of basic research.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> That was "nano" with the contribution on HIT, right ?
    >>>
    >>> Right.
    >>>
    >>>> I happen to have contributed to that development (and still do).
    >>>> But this is not such a good example, since it did not drop
    >>>> out of a big expensive experiment by chance.
    >>>> In fact it has roots in the simple energy loss formula by Bethe &
    >>>> Co (1930s), the idea by Wilson (1940s) to use
    >>>> the proton Bragg peak for radiotherapy and a single curve by Barendsen
    >>>> showing higher cell killing efficiency of heavier ions (1960s).
    >>>> Since then it was hard, very directed work to put together the pieces
    >>>> of the puzzle which eventually led to this new type of radiotherapy.
    >>>
    >>> By "modern" I meant that the setup in "nano" was modern. In
    >>> contrast, traditional X-ray machines haven't changed much in decades
    >>> (though at least where I have mine done, there is no longer film in
    >>> the cartridge, but rather some detector, presumably similar to a
    >>> CCD---huge advantage in that the images can be seen right away),
    >>> though of course there have been advances in CT etc.
    >>>

    >>
    >> The "modern" X-ray tube, still used in most X-ray machines, was
    >> developed about 100 years ago by William D. Coolidge who
    >> worked for General Electric. To get this back on topic, Coolidge
    >> was born in Hudson Massachusetts, home of the infamous DEC Fab.
    >>
    >> Closer to home, my grandfather bought his house from Coolidge's
    >> father in the early 1920's, and my dad was born there. I'm not
    >> sure if this was the Coolidge family home, or just a 2nd house
    >> they owned. The Coolidges still lived across the street when I
    >> was a kid. (William Coolidge died at age 101 in 1975, but I'm
    >> pretty sure he didn't live there, though he was probably born in one
    >> of the two houses, either my grandparents' house or the one across
    >> the street.) This also puts me at 3 or 4 degrees of separation
    >> from Thomas Edison. Not quite as cool as being descended from one
    >> of the Lumiere brothers, but close ;-) (Hi, Didier, if you're still
    >> reading c.o.v.)
    >>

    >
    > Was Coolidge Corner in Brookline named after him?


    I don't think so, there are a lot of Coolidges in New England...

    (While trying to find the answer, I came across an 1852 map of the
    Boston area. It has individual properties marked, outside the built-up
    areas. There are at least 6 Coolidges within a half mile of my
    house, in what is now Belmont. Curiously, I couldn't find any
    near Coolidge Corner!)






    --
    John Santos
    Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.
    781-861-0670 ext 539

  3. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    On Sep 25, 8:38*pm, AEF wrote:
    > On Sep 25, 6:43 pm, AEF wrote:
    >
    > Uh, you can get a lot more science from unmanned probes, though the
    > moon rocks were rather useful, but expensive. Also, Hubble was worth
    > it, IMO. But going to the moon is expensive and we already have some
    > moon rocks. Going further to Mars? Talk about expensive! (And that
    > leaves out all the other major obstacles and risk.)
    >
    > AEF- Hide quoted text -
    >


    Adding to your points, look at how much science is coming from Spirit
    and Opportunity. A manned mission to MARS would have been limited to
    the amount of time men could survive there (as well as the orbital
    positions or Earth and Mars). Spirit and Opportunity were designed to
    last 3 months but are now into their 4 year.

    The volume of science from Hubble is embarrassingly huge. Hubble is
    probably the most productive scientific experiment ever built and
    given humanity the enigma of "dark energy" and, to a lesser extent,
    "dark matter". (FYI: the beginnings of "dark matter" come from Fritz
    Zwicky in 1933 and Vera Rubin in 1970)

    On the flip-side, I would like to see a permanent manned base on the
    moon (which is only 3 days away if a rescue is required; While
    machines will always be able to deliver more science for the invseted
    dollor, there is something compelling about a permanent human lunar
    settlement. Also, building really large optical observatories (mirrors
    could be manufactured "up there") is one possibility; large radio
    telescopes on the dark side of the moon (shielded from Earth) is
    another possibility. Unlike the ISS, a lunar observatory would yield a
    larger volume of science.

    Neil Rieck
    Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,
    Ontario, Canada.
    http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/

  4. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    In article <8d847f92-1f04-47ed-a827-bae920245111@x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
    AEF writes:
    > On Sep 25, 8:58*am, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    >> In article <331ce77d-49f6-48a6-810a-69946005b...@r66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
    >> * * * * AEF writes:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> > On Sep 23, 12:42 pm, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    >> >> In article ,
    >> >> * * * * hel...@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:

    >>
    >> >> > In article <6js62cF4rf5...@mid.individual.net>, billg...@cs.uofs.edu
    >> >> > (Bill Gunshannon) writes:

    >>
    >> >> >> Yes, he did. *Mere days before sighting land. *And at a point where he
    >> >> >> had actually travelled less than half the distance any educated person
    >> >> >> of the time would have known it would take to reach the far east while
    >> >> >> traveling in that direction. *Contrary to popular belief no educated
    >> >> >> person of the time aactually thought the earth was flat. *The ancient
    >> >> >> greeks had determined it was round and had done a pretty good job of
    >> >> >> computing it's circumferance. *So, based on the amount of rations
    >> >> >> Columbus left Spain with and the knowledge he is known to have had
    >> >> >> (and some he is suspected to have had) it becomes obvious that "The
    >> >> >> Far East" was never his target because assuming an all sea route in a
    >> >> >> westerly direction, he left with insuffucient rations to make the trip.

    >>
    >> >> > Columbus used a smaller value for the circumference of the Earth than
    >> >> > the correct value,

    >>
    >> >> Smaller is an understatement as he missed it by more than 50%. *A
    >> >> navigator who made mistakes like that would hardly have lasted as
    >> >> long as he had or had a reputaion supposedly as good as his.

    >>
    >> >> > * * * * * * * * * * *even though other folks at the time had something
    >> >> > quite close to the correct value.

    >>
    >> >> At the time? *Try more than 1400 years earlier.

    >>
    >> > Why does this matter?

    >>
    >> >> > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Was this intentional on his part to
    >> >> > make his plans sound more realistic, or did he really believe in the
    >> >> > smaller value?

    >>
    >> >> Or did he have pre-knowledge of the existence of the North and South
    >> >> American (although obviously not under that name) continents and merely
    >> >> bilked Ferdinand and Isabella into financing his boondogle to se what
    >> >> was there!!

    >>
    >> > Or did he prefer dogs or cats? This is pure speculation. Maybe he did?
    >> > Maybe not. Is there any evidence at all to make what you suspect
    >> > plausible?

    >>
    >> The known existence of a map showing the coastline of north and south
    >> america. *The fact that he obviously knew the true circumference of
    >> the earth. *The fact that he took just enough supplies to reach that
    >> destination and way too little to actully reach India by traveling west.
    >> Looks kinda like simple math to add them *up. *You do realize that
    >> Spain wasn't the first place asked to fiannce this boondogle. *Others,
    >> refused.

    > CBS refused Star Trek in favor of Lost in Space!


    Isn't that like being offered a bag of horse manure or a bag of cow manure?


    > So what great riches was he hoping to find in the Americas?


    Actually, I don't think greed was his motive. I believe he wanted to
    discover and explore a place he knew his European counterparts had never
    seen. But no one was going to finance that. So he made up a an absurd
    theory about reaching India and bilked Spain into financing it. And
    got called a hero for his effort.

    bill

    --
    Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
    billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    University of Scranton |
    Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

  5. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    Neil Rieck wrote:

    > another possibility. Unlike the ISS, a lunar observatory would yield a
    > larger volume of science.


    To make a twist on the "the computer is the network" or "the network is
    the computer":

    The ISS itself is the science. People don't really realise that. It
    isn't those little experiemnts where they watch crystals grow on the ISS
    that matter.

    The real science was the making of the ISS and developping tools to work
    in 0g. And the real science was testiong various equipment to develop
    knowledge on MTBF, the types of failures they experience, how to do
    field service, what spare parts and how many you need etc etc.

    Consider all the R&D and software developped for the manipulator arm.
    There is sophisticated image recognition that allows the arm to align
    itself in 3d. It isn't enough for the effector to reach a certain point,
    it needs to reach it in a certain attitude, while making sure its elbox
    doesn't knock something else.

    Consider that anything with water in 0g is extremely difficult to get
    right. The russians have had lots of problems with their oxygen
    generator. (with gravity, it is rather easy to extract the bubbles of O2
    and H2 from electrolysis since they naturally move to the top of the
    liquid, not so in 0G).

    If/when we gosub mars, we will have an ISS like ship, and it is the
    experience with ISS that will allow us to have more reliable systems,
    and for those systems known to not be reliable, how many spare parts are
    needed and what procedures are needed to debug/fix the problems.

    Similarly, they have many computer problems with their windows laptops
    on ISS (susprise ?). Many could be caused because of cosmic rays. These
    are problems that cannot be predicted/reproduced on earth, and having
    the ISS does provide us with hard numbers on hardware reliability.

    This may not be science as "pure" as particle physics, but it is
    extremely valuable experience at an engineering level. As well, it has
    allowed the building of many systems that can be re-used for a mars
    expedition ship. (consider just the CBM mechanisms that allow modules
    on the USA side to be attached together.)

  6. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    In article
    , Neil
    Rieck writes:

    > On the flip-side, I would like to see a permanent manned base on the
    > moon (which is only 3 days away if a rescue is required; While
    > machines will always be able to deliver more science for the invseted
    > dollor, there is something compelling about a permanent human lunar
    > settlement.


    I agree. It is conceivable that Richard Branson and his ilk will do
    this commercially.

    > Also, building really large optical observatories (mirrors
    > could be manufactured "up there") is one possibility; large radio
    > telescopes on the dark side of the moon (shielded from Earth)


    Actually, it's the FAR side of the Moon. The Moon rotates, but since
    the speed of rotation is the same as that of revolution about the Earth,
    we see only one side, so there is a constant far side which is never
    seen from Earth. When we have new Moon, then the far side is entirely
    lit.

    Of course, you might have been thinking about the Pink Floyd album, THE
    DARK SIDE OF THE MOON. Considering the depressing subject matter of
    that album, it's more of a metaphorical title. At the very end, a voice
    says "There is no dark side of the Moon really---as a matter of fact
    it's all dark.". Again, take it metaphorically. On the other hand, the
    Moon IS all dark---its colour is about the same as that of asphalt. It
    only appears bright in contrast with the dark sky.

    > is
    > another possibility. Unlike the ISS, a lunar observatory would yield a
    > larger volume of science.


    Indeed.


  7. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    In article , Neil Rieck writes:
    >On Sep 25, 8:38=A0pm, AEF wrote:
    >> On Sep 25, 6:43 pm, AEF wrote:
    >>
    >> Uh, you can get a lot more science from unmanned probes, though the
    >> moon rocks were rather useful, but expensive. Also, Hubble was worth
    >> it, IMO. But going to the moon is expensive and we already have some
    >> moon rocks. Going further to Mars? Talk about expensive! (And that
    >> leaves out all the other major obstacles and risk.)
    >>
    >> AEF- Hide quoted text -
    >>

    >
    >Adding to your points, look at how much science is coming from Spirit
    >and Opportunity. A manned mission to MARS would have been limited to
    >the amount of time men could survive there (as well as the orbital
    >positions or Earth and Mars). Spirit and Opportunity were designed to
    >last 3 months but are now into their 4 year.
    >

    Most of the ideas from Mars Direct onwards for missions to Mars have involved
    the crew spending at least 18 months on the surface of Mars.


    >The volume of science from Hubble is embarrassingly huge. Hubble is
    >probably the most productive scientific experiment ever built and
    >given humanity the enigma of "dark energy" and, to a lesser extent,
    >"dark matter". (FYI: the beginnings of "dark matter" come from Fritz
    >Zwicky in 1933 and Vera Rubin in 1970)
    >
    >On the flip-side, I would like to see a permanent manned base on the
    >moon (which is only 3 days away if a rescue is required; While
    >machines will always be able to deliver more science for the invseted
    >dollor, there is something compelling about a permanent human lunar
    >settlement. Also, building really large optical observatories (mirrors
    >could be manufactured "up there") is one possibility; large radio
    >telescopes on the dark side of the moon (shielded from Earth) is
    >another possibility. Unlike the ISS, a lunar observatory would yield a
    >larger volume of science.
    >

    I totally agree about a manned base on the Moon but think human exploration of
    Mars (and a permanent settlement there) is entirley feasible and worthwhile.

    David Webb
    Security team leader
    CCSS
    Middlesex University


    >Neil Rieck
    >Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,
    >Ontario, Canada.
    >http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/


  8. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    In article <48dcd167$0$12377$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes:
    >Neil Rieck wrote:
    >
    >> another possibility. Unlike the ISS, a lunar observatory would yield a
    >> larger volume of science.

    >
    >To make a twist on the "the computer is the network" or "the network is
    >the computer":
    >
    >The ISS itself is the science. People don't really realise that. It
    >isn't those little experiemnts where they watch crystals grow on the ISS
    >that matter.
    >
    >The real science was the making of the ISS and developping tools to work
    >in 0g. And the real science was testiong various equipment to develop
    >knowledge on MTBF, the types of failures they experience, how to do
    >field service, what spare parts and how many you need etc etc.
    >
    >Consider all the R&D and software developped for the manipulator arm.
    >There is sophisticated image recognition that allows the arm to align
    >itself in 3d. It isn't enough for the effector to reach a certain point,
    >it needs to reach it in a certain attitude, while making sure its elbox
    >doesn't knock something else.
    >
    >Consider that anything with water in 0g is extremely difficult to get
    >right. The russians have had lots of problems with their oxygen
    >generator. (with gravity, it is rather easy to extract the bubbles of O2
    >and H2 from electrolysis since they naturally move to the top of the
    >liquid, not so in 0G).
    >
    >If/when we gosub mars, we will have an ISS like ship, and it is the
    >experience with ISS that will allow us to have more reliable systems,
    >and for those systems known to not be reliable, how many spare parts are
    >needed and what procedures are needed to debug/fix the problems.
    >

    I doubt it. The best solution to voyaging to Mars would be a two tethered ship
    approach spinning to create "artificial gravity". Travelling to Mars at 0g
    is not a good idea - the crew would be too weak when they reached their
    destination.


    David Webb
    Security team leader
    CCSS
    Middlesex University


    >Similarly, they have many computer problems with their windows laptops
    >on ISS (susprise ?). Many could be caused because of cosmic rays. These
    >are problems that cannot be predicted/reproduced on earth, and having
    >the ISS does provide us with hard numbers on hardware reliability.
    >
    >This may not be science as "pure" as particle physics, but it is
    >extremely valuable experience at an engineering level. As well, it has
    >allowed the building of many systems that can be re-used for a mars
    >expedition ship. (consider just the CBM mechanisms that allow modules
    >on the USA side to be attached together.)


  9. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    On Sep 26, 7:43 am, Neil Rieck wrote:
    > On Sep 25, 8:38 pm, AEF wrote:
    >
    > > On Sep 25, 6:43 pm, AEF wrote:

    >
    > > Uh, you can get a lot more science from unmanned probes, though the
    > > moon rocks were rather useful, but expensive. Also, Hubble was worth
    > > it, IMO. But going to the moon is expensive and we already have some
    > > moon rocks. Going further to Mars? Talk about expensive! (And that
    > > leaves out all the other major obstacles and risk.)

    >
    > > AEF- Hide quoted text -

    >
    > Adding to your points, look at how much science is coming from Spirit
    > and Opportunity. A manned mission to MARS would have been limited to
    > the amount of time men could survive there (as well as the orbital
    > positions or Earth and Mars). Spirit and Opportunity were designed to
    > last 3 months but are now into their 4 year.


    You know, to be honest, I'm beginning to think that these estimates of
    the lifetime of space stuff are deliberately and grossly
    underestimated. Then they can say, "Look, it was only supposed to last
    for. . . ."

    >
    > The volume of science from Hubble is embarrassingly huge. Hubble is
    > probably the most productive scientific experiment ever built and
    > given humanity the enigma of "dark energy" and, to a lesser extent,
    > "dark matter". (FYI: the beginnings of "dark matter" come from Fritz
    > Zwicky in 1933 and Vera Rubin in 1970)
    >
    > On the flip-side, I would like to see a permanent manned base on the
    > moon (which is only 3 days away if a rescue is required; While
    > machines will always be able to deliver more science for the invseted
    > dollor, there is something compelling about a permanent human lunar
    > settlement. Also, building really large optical observatories (mirrors
    > could be manufactured "up there") is one possibility; large radio
    > telescopes on the dark side of the moon (shielded from Earth) is
    > another possibility. Unlike the ISS, a lunar observatory would yield a
    > larger volume of science.


    The only problem with this is that for the same cost you could do a
    LOT more unmanned stuff. But Hubble is the counterexample. Also, I
    remember reading a sci-fi story about doing astronomy on the moon with
    someone saying something like, "I can't imagine how astronomy ever got
    started on Earth with all that atmospheric distortion." But I don't
    know if this would be any better than the Hubble.

    AEF

    > Neil Rieck
    > Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,
    > Ontario, Canada.http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/



  10. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    On Sep 26, 7:58*am, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    > In article <8d847f92-1f04-47ed-a827-bae920245...@x35g2000hsb.googlegroups..com>,
    > * * * * AEF writes:
    >
    >
    >
    > > On Sep 25, 8:58*am, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    > >> In article <331ce77d-49f6-48a6-810a-69946005b...@r66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
    > >> * * * * AEF writes:

    >
    > >> > On Sep 23, 12:42 pm, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    > >> >> In article ,
    > >> >> * * * * hel...@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:

    >
    > >> >> > In article <6js62cF4rf5...@mid.individual.net>, billg...@cs.uofs.edu
    > >> >> > (Bill Gunshannon) writes:

    >
    > >> >> >> Yes, he did. *Mere days before sighting land. *And at a point where he
    > >> >> >> had actually travelled less than half the distance any educated person
    > >> >> >> of the time would have known it would take to reach the far eastwhile
    > >> >> >> traveling in that direction. *Contrary to popular belief no educated
    > >> >> >> person of the time aactually thought the earth was flat. *The ancient
    > >> >> >> greeks had determined it was round and had done a pretty good job of
    > >> >> >> computing it's circumferance. *So, based on the amount of rations


    The Egyptians figured out a way to mummify their dead Pharoahs, but
    does anyone know it?

    Just because a people figured out something long ago, that doesn't
    mean it's still known centuries later.

    > >> >> >> Columbus left Spain with and the knowledge he is known to have had
    > >> >> >> (and some he is suspected to have had) it becomes obvious that "The
    > >> >> >> Far East" was never his target because assuming an all sea routein a
    > >> >> >> westerly direction, he left with insuffucient rations to make the trip.

    >
    > >> >> > Columbus used a smaller value for the circumference of the Earth than
    > >> >> > the correct value,

    >
    > >> >> Smaller is an understatement as he missed it by more than 50%. *A
    > >> >> navigator who made mistakes like that would hardly have lasted as
    > >> >> long as he had or had a reputaion supposedly as good as his.

    >
    > >> >> > * * * * * * * * * * *even though other folks at the time had something
    > >> >> > quite close to the correct value.

    >
    > >> >> At the time? *Try more than 1400 years earlier.

    >
    > >> > Why does this matter?


    Because people forget. See above.

    >
    > >> >> > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Was this intentional on his part to
    > >> >> > make his plans sound more realistic, or did he really believe in the
    > >> >> > smaller value?

    >
    > >> >> Or did he have pre-knowledge of the existence of the North and South
    > >> >> American (although obviously not under that name) continents and merely
    > >> >> bilked Ferdinand and Isabella into financing his boondogle to se what
    > >> >> was there!!


    Or did he want what was behind the box next to the beautiful Carol
    Maryl?

    >
    > >> > Or did he prefer dogs or cats? This is pure speculation. Maybe he did?
    > >> > Maybe not. Is there any evidence at all to make what you suspect
    > >> > plausible?

    >
    > >> The known existence of a map showing the coastline of north and south
    > >> america. *The fact that he obviously knew the true circumference of
    > >> the earth. *The fact that he took just enough supplies to reach that
    > >> destination and way too little to actully reach India by traveling west.
    > >> Looks kinda like simple math to add them *up. *You do realize that
    > >> Spain wasn't the first place asked to fiannce this boondogle. *Others,
    > >> refused.

    > > CBS refused Star Trek in favor of Lost in Space!

    >
    > Isn't that like being offered a bag of horse manure or a bag of cow manure?


    Nope, and it's your loss.

    >
    > > So what great riches was he hoping to find in the Americas?

    >
    > Actually, I don't think greed was his motive. *I believe he wanted to
    > discover and explore a place he knew his European counterparts had never
    > seen. *But no one was going to finance that. *So he made up a an absurd
    > theory about reaching India and bilked Spain into financing it. *And
    > got called a hero for his effort.


    Well, I meant motive.

    Fine, so Bob K. came up with a poor example in your opinion. That
    doesn't necessarily invalidate his point, and I believe he had another
    example. Let's move on already.

    AEF

    >
    > bill
    >
    > --
    > Bill Gunshannon * * * * *| *de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. *Three wolves
    > billg...@cs.scranton.edu | *and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    > University of Scranton * |
    > Scranton, Pennsylvania * | * * * * #include *



  11. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    On Sep 26, 10:24*am, davi...@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote:
    > In article , Neil Rieck writes:
    >
    > >On Sep 25, 8:38=A0pm, AEF wrote:
    > >> On Sep 25, 6:43 pm, AEF wrote:

    >
    > >> Uh, you can get a lot more science from unmanned probes, though the
    > >> moon rocks were rather useful, but expensive. Also, Hubble was worth
    > >> it, IMO. But going to the moon is expensive and we already have some
    > >> moon rocks. Going further to Mars? Talk about expensive! (And that
    > >> leaves out all the other major obstacles and risk.)

    >
    > >> AEF- Hide quoted text -

    >
    > >Adding to your points, look at how much science is coming from Spirit
    > >and Opportunity. A manned mission to MARS would have been limited to
    > >the amount of time men could survive there (as well as the orbital
    > >positions or Earth and Mars). Spirit and Opportunity were designed to
    > >last 3 months but are now into their 4 year.

    >
    > Most of the ideas from Mars Direct onwards for missions to Mars have involved
    > the crew spending at least 18 months on the surface of Mars.
    >
    >
    >
    > >The volume of science from Hubble is embarrassingly huge. Hubble is
    > >probably the most productive scientific experiment ever built and
    > >given humanity the enigma of "dark energy" and, to a lesser extent,
    > >"dark matter". (FYI: the beginnings of "dark matter" come from Fritz
    > >Zwicky in 1933 and Vera Rubin in 1970)

    >
    > >On the flip-side, I would like to see a permanent manned base on the
    > >moon (which is only 3 days away if a rescue is required; While
    > >machines will always be able to deliver more science for the invseted
    > >dollor, there is something compelling about a permanent human lunar
    > >settlement. Also, building really large optical observatories (mirrors
    > >could be manufactured "up there") is one possibility; large radio
    > >telescopes on the dark side of the moon (shielded from Earth) is
    > >another possibility. Unlike the ISS, a lunar observatory would yield a
    > >larger volume of science.

    >
    > I totally agree about a manned base on the Moon but think human exploration of
    > Mars (and a permanent settlement there) is entirley feasible and worthwhile.


    But the ISS has already cost what? Over $20 billion? And you want to
    go to Mars?

    Well, the LHC is certainly a bargain compared to either of these!

    >
    > David Webb
    > Security team leader
    > CCSS
    > Middlesex University
    >
    > >Neil Rieck
    > >Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,
    > >Ontario, Canada.
    > >http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/

    >
    >



  12. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    In article ,
    AEF writes:
    > On Sep 26, 7:58*am, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    >> In article <8d847f92-1f04-47ed-a827-bae920245...@x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
    >> * * * * AEF writes:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> > On Sep 25, 8:58*am, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    >> >> In article <331ce77d-49f6-48a6-810a-69946005b...@r66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
    >> >> * * * * AEF writes:

    >>
    >> >> > On Sep 23, 12:42 pm, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    >> >> >> In article ,
    >> >> >> * * * * hel...@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:

    >>
    >> >> >> > In article <6js62cF4rf5...@mid.individual.net>, billg...@cs.uofs.edu
    >> >> >> > (Bill Gunshannon) writes:

    >>
    >> >> >> >> Yes, he did. *Mere days before sighting land. *And at a point where he
    >> >> >> >> had actually travelled less than half the distance any educated person
    >> >> >> >> of the time would have known it would take to reach the far east while
    >> >> >> >> traveling in that direction. *Contrary to popular belief no educated
    >> >> >> >> person of the time aactually thought the earth was flat. *The ancient
    >> >> >> >> greeks had determined it was round and had done a pretty good job of
    >> >> >> >> computing it's circumferance. *So, based on the amount of rations

    > The Egyptians figured out a way to mummify their dead Pharoahs, but
    > does anyone know it?


    Ummm... Yeah. I knew that in grade school.

    > Just because a people figured out something long ago, that doesn't
    > mean it's still known centuries later.


    One would expect that something useful would continue ot be used.
    What the Greeks knew in 100BC is not only still known today it is still
    being taught today.

    >> >> >> >> Columbus left Spain with and the knowledge he is known to have had
    >> >> >> >> (and some he is suspected to have had) it becomes obvious that "The
    >> >> >> >> Far East" was never his target because assuming an all sea route in a
    >> >> >> >> westerly direction, he left with insuffucient rations to make the trip.

    >>
    >> >> >> > Columbus used a smaller value for the circumference of the Earth than
    >> >> >> > the correct value,

    >>
    >> >> >> Smaller is an understatement as he missed it by more than 50%. *A
    >> >> >> navigator who made mistakes like that would hardly have lasted as
    >> >> >> long as he had or had a reputaion supposedly as good as his.

    >>
    >> >> >> > * * * * * * * * * * *even though other folks at the time had something
    >> >> >> > quite close to the correct value.

    >>
    >> >> >> At the time? *Try more than 1400 years earlier.

    >>
    >> >> > Why does this matter?

    > Because people forget. See above.


    People, as a whole, don't just forget. And,a s I said above what the Greeks
    knew in 100 BC was still being taught at the time of Columbus and is still
    being taught today. Nobody just forgot.

    >>
    >> >> >> > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Was this intentional on his part to
    >> >> >> > make his plans sound more realistic, or did he really believe in the
    >> >> >> > smaller value?

    >>
    >> >> >> Or did he have pre-knowledge of the existence of the North and South
    >> >> >> American (although obviously not under that name) continents and merely
    >> >> >> bilked Ferdinand and Isabella into financing his boondogle to se what
    >> >> >> was there!!

    > Or did he want what was behind the box next to the beautiful Carol
    > Maryl?


    Apparently King Ferdinand did because Columbus turned out to be just as
    good a huckster as Monty Hall.

    >>
    >> >> > Or did he prefer dogs or cats? This is pure speculation. Maybe he did?
    >> >> > Maybe not. Is there any evidence at all to make what you suspect
    >> >> > plausible?

    >>
    >> >> The known existence of a map showing the coastline of north and south
    >> >> america. *The fact that he obviously knew the true circumference of
    >> >> the earth. *The fact that he took just enough supplies to reach that
    >> >> destination and way too little to actully reach India by traveling west.
    >> >> Looks kinda like simple math to add them *up. *You do realize that
    >> >> Spain wasn't the first place asked to fiannce this boondogle. *Others,
    >> >> refused.
    >> > CBS refused Star Trek in favor of Lost in Space!

    >>
    >> Isn't that like being offered a bag of horse manure or a bag of cow manure?

    > Nope, and it's your loss.


    How is my belief that TV has been the biggest waste of scientific research
    the earth has ever seen my loss? I find much more productive things to do
    with my time than to sit and gawk at "The vast wasteland".

    >>
    >> > So what great riches was he hoping to find in the Americas?

    >>
    >> Actually, I don't think greed was his motive. *I believe he wanted to
    >> discover and explore a place he knew his European counterparts had never
    >> seen. *But no one was going to finance that. *So he made up a an absurd
    >> theory about reaching India and bilked Spain into financing it. *And
    >> got called a hero for his effort.

    > Well, I meant motive.
    > Fine, so Bob K. came up with a poor example in your opinion. That
    > doesn't necessarily invalidate his point, and I believe he had another
    > example. Let's move on already.


    Consider the topic dropped.

    bill

    --
    Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
    billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    University of Scranton |
    Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

  13. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    On Sep 26, 12:17*pm, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    > In article ,
    > * * * * AEF writes:
    >
    >
    >
    > > On Sep 26, 7:58*am, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    > >> In article <8d847f92-1f04-47ed-a827-bae920245...@x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
    > >> * * * * AEF writes:

    >
    > >> > On Sep 25, 8:58*am, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    > >> >> In article <331ce77d-49f6-48a6-810a-69946005b...@r66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
    > >> >> * * * * AEF writes:

    >
    > >> >> > On Sep 23, 12:42 pm, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    > >> >> >> In article ,
    > >> >> >> * * * * hel...@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:

    >
    > >> >> >> > In article <6js62cF4rf5...@mid.individual.net>, billg...@cs.uofs.edu
    > >> >> >> > (Bill Gunshannon) writes:

    >
    > >> >> >> >> Yes, he did. *Mere days before sighting land. *And at a point where he
    > >> >> >> >> had actually travelled less than half the distance any educated person
    > >> >> >> >> of the time would have known it would take to reach the far east while
    > >> >> >> >> traveling in that direction. *Contrary to popular belief noeducated
    > >> >> >> >> person of the time aactually thought the earth was flat. *The ancient
    > >> >> >> >> greeks had determined it was round and had done a pretty goodjob of
    > >> >> >> >> computing it's circumferance. *So, based on the amount of rations

    > > The Egyptians figured out a way to mummify their dead Pharoahs, but
    > > does anyone know it?

    >
    > Ummm... *Yeah. *I knew that in grade school.


    Why, then, did the ancients know that the planets went around the Sun,
    but there was still Ptolemy and Copernicus?

    >
    > > Just because a people figured out something long ago, that doesn't
    > > mean it's still known centuries later.

    >
    > One would expect that something useful would continue ot be used.
    > What the Greeks knew in 100BC is not only still known today it is still
    > being taught today.


    Then why don't present-day Egyptians know the ancient secret of
    mummification and how those same ancients built pyramids?

    >
    >
    >
    > >> >> >> >> Columbus left Spain with and the knowledge he is known to have had
    > >> >> >> >> (and some he is suspected to have had) it becomes obvious that "The
    > >> >> >> >> Far East" was never his target because assuming an all sea route in a
    > >> >> >> >> westerly direction, he left with insuffucient rations to makethe trip.

    >
    > >> >> >> > Columbus used a smaller value for the circumference of the Earth than
    > >> >> >> > the correct value,

    >
    > >> >> >> Smaller is an understatement as he missed it by more than 50%. *A
    > >> >> >> navigator who made mistakes like that would hardly have lasted as
    > >> >> >> long as he had or had a reputaion supposedly as good as his.

    >
    > >> >> >> > * * * * * * * * * * *even though other folks at the time had something
    > >> >> >> > quite close to the correct value.

    >
    > >> >> >> At the time? *Try more than 1400 years earlier.

    >
    > >> >> > Why does this matter?

    > > Because people forget. See above.

    >
    > People, as a whole, don't just forget. *And,a s I said above what the Greeks
    > knew in 100 BC was still being taught at the time of Columbus and is still
    > being taught today. *Nobody just forgot.


    See above.
    >
    >
    >
    > >> >> >> > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Was this intentional on his part to
    > >> >> >> > make his plans sound more realistic, or did he really believe in the
    > >> >> >> > smaller value?

    >
    > >> >> >> Or did he have pre-knowledge of the existence of the North and South
    > >> >> >> American (although obviously not under that name) continents andmerely
    > >> >> >> bilked Ferdinand and Isabella into financing his boondogle to sewhat
    > >> >> >> was there!!

    > > Or did he want what was behind the box next to the beautiful Carol
    > > Maryl?

    >
    > Apparently King Ferdinand did because Columbus turned out to be just as
    > good a huckster as Monty Hall.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > >> >> > Or did he prefer dogs or cats? This is pure speculation. Maybe hedid?
    > >> >> > Maybe not. Is there any evidence at all to make what you suspect
    > >> >> > plausible?

    >
    > >> >> The known existence of a map showing the coastline of north and south
    > >> >> america. *The fact that he obviously knew the true circumference of
    > >> >> the earth. *The fact that he took just enough supplies to reach that
    > >> >> destination and way too little to actully reach India by traveling west.
    > >> >> Looks kinda like simple math to add them *up. *You do realize that
    > >> >> Spain wasn't the first place asked to fiannce this boondogle. *Others,
    > >> >> refused.
    > >> > CBS refused Star Trek in favor of Lost in Space!

    >
    > >> Isn't that like being offered a bag of horse manure or a bag of cow manure?

    > > Nope, and it's your loss.

    >
    > How is my belief that TV has been the biggest waste of scientific research
    > the earth has ever seen my loss?


    That's not what you said.

    *I find much more productive things to do
    > with my time than to sit and gawk at "The vast wasteland".


    Like participate in this thread?



    >
    >
    >
    > >> > So what great riches was he hoping to find in the Americas?

    >
    > >> Actually, I don't think greed was his motive. *I believe he wanted to
    > >> discover and explore a place he knew his European counterparts had never
    > >> seen. *But no one was going to finance that. *So he made up a an absurd
    > >> theory about reaching India and bilked Spain into financing it. *And
    > >> got called a hero for his effort.

    > > Well, I meant motive.
    > > Fine, so Bob K. came up with a poor example in your opinion. That
    > > doesn't necessarily invalidate his point, and I believe he had another
    > > example. Let's move on already.

    >
    > Consider the topic dropped.


    OK.

    AEF

    >
    > bill
    >
    > --
    > Bill Gunshannon * * * * *| *de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. *Three wolves
    > billg...@cs.scranton.edu | *and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    > University of Scranton * |
    > Scranton, Pennsylvania * | * * * * #include *



  14. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote:

    > I doubt it. The best solution to voyaging to Mars would be a two tethered ship
    > approach spinning to create "artificial gravity". Travelling to Mars at 0g
    > is not a good idea - the crew would be too weak when they reached their
    > destination.


    This is why they are evaluating various exercise equipment on the ISS
    and calculating how many hours per day each crewmember must exercise to
    stay in relative strength/health.

    The ISS is far more valuable to humankind than some dinky station on the
    moon. Humankind needs to master how to live/operate in 0g in order to
    make it to other worlds like mars.

    Granted, in some 50 years, Z Cochrane will test the first warp engines,
    and after that the Vulcans will give us the technology for artificial
    gravity, but until then, we need to proceed as if that historical event
    will not happen.

  15. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    Bill Gunshannon wrote:

    > People, as a whole, don't just forget.



    People at HP have most certaintly forgotten about VMS' potential and how
    great an OS it was.

    I have been stuck a couple of times trying to write with a pen in
    attached letters and forgetting how to draw certain letters.

    Had analogue watches been eradicated, kids today might not know the
    meaning of "clockwise".

    What percentage of kids today still learn how to use a slide rule ?


    Now, consider the "born again extremist religions" in the USA where they
    wish to ban the teaching of evolution. If this were to happen
    nationwide, only a few heretics would teach their kids about evolution
    and the rest would grow up convinced that god created humans as humans.
    Within a generation or two, the population common knowledge about
    evolution would be lost.

    Consider urban dwellers who have no experience on how to build a fire in
    a fireplace. Or how to slaughter some cattle and cut it up so it can be
    cooked. They only know how to buy shrinkwrapped cuts of meat at a
    supermarket.


    So, in the big picture, it is entirely possible to see a civilisation
    abandon some knowledge and within a generation or two, it would be
    totally gone (especially before books happened).

    Also, in the case of the mummies, it is likely that only a few special
    priests or whatever were given the knowledge on how to process a
    pharaons's body to have it mummify. And it is likely that at one point,
    when the era of the pharaons ended, the new leader had all those special
    guys executed because they were loyal to the pharaons, and at that
    point, the knowledge on how to process bodies was really lost.


    Similarly, in a company, when you have the one VMS person who knows
    about VMS, and he leaves/fired/downsized, there is nobody left within
    the company to run the VMS system. Eventually, they bring in some
    consultant to fix things, but there is no transfer of knowledge from the
    former VMS manager to the new consultant.

  16. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    In article , AEF writes:
    >
    > The only problem with this is that for the same cost you could do a
    > LOT more unmanned stuff. But Hubble is the counterexample. Also, I
    > remember reading a sci-fi story about doing astronomy on the moon with
    > someone saying something like, "I can't imagine how astronomy ever got
    > started on Earth with all that atmospheric distortion." But I don't
    > know if this would be any better than the Hubble.


    In some ways it would be better than Hubble, which orbits the Earth
    every 90 minutes or so and can't point too close to the Sun or moon,
    so it can only image polar objects for really long times.

    A telescope on the far side of the moon could image ecliptic objects
    for long times. But operating in moon dust could really cut its
    light gathering efficiency.

    Which is why the James Webb Space Telescope will go to L2, and
    the Spitzer Space Telescope is in an Earth trailing solar orbit.

    More importantly, radio telescopes on the Earth have to deal with all
    our noise, while a radio telescope on the far side of the moon is
    shielded from all that. That would be a real improvement in radio
    telescopes.


  17. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    In article , AEF writes:
    >
    > Why, then, did the ancients know that the planets went around the Sun,
    > but there was still Ptolemy and Copernicus?


    Nobody told the Pope.


  18. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    In article <48dd49df$0$4544$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes:
    >
    > Granted, in some 50 years, Z Cochrane will test the first warp engines,
    > and after that the Vulcans will give us the technology for artificial
    > gravity, but until then, we need to proceed as if that historical event
    > will not happen.


    Unfortunately Cochrane has been split into two: the original
    "of Alpha Centauri" and the Terran who got Troi drunk.

    Must be awfully hard to get things done when you're that split up.


  19. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    On Sep 26, 12:17*pm, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    > In article ,
    > * * * * AEF writes:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > On Sep 26, 7:58*am, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    > >> In article <8d847f92-1f04-47ed-a827-bae920245...@x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
    > >> * * * * AEF writes:

    >
    > >> > On Sep 25, 8:58*am, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    > >> >> In article <331ce77d-49f6-48a6-810a-69946005b...@r66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
    > >> >> * * * * AEF writes:

    >
    > >> >> > On Sep 23, 12:42 pm, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    > >> >> >> In article ,
    > >> >> >> * * * * hel...@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:

    >
    > >> >> >> > In article <6js62cF4rf5...@mid.individual.net>, billg...@cs.uofs.edu
    > >> >> >> > (Bill Gunshannon) writes:

    >
    > >> >> >> >> Yes, he did. *Mere days before sighting land. *And at a point where he
    > >> >> >> >> had actually travelled less than half the distance any educated person
    > >> >> >> >> of the time would have known it would take to reach the far east while
    > >> >> >> >> traveling in that direction. *Contrary to popular belief noeducated
    > >> >> >> >> person of the time aactually thought the earth was flat. *The ancient
    > >> >> >> >> greeks had determined it was round and had done a pretty goodjob of
    > >> >> >> >> computing it's circumferance. *So, based on the amount of rations

    > > The Egyptians figured out a way to mummify their dead Pharoahs, but
    > > does anyone know it?

    >
    > Ummm... *Yeah. *I knew that in grade school.
    >
    > > Just because a people figured out something long ago, that doesn't
    > > mean it's still known centuries later.

    >
    > One would expect that something useful would continue ot be used.
    > What the Greeks knew in 100BC is not only still known today it is still
    > being taught today.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > >> >> >> >> Columbus left Spain with and the knowledge he is known to have had
    > >> >> >> >> (and some he is suspected to have had) it becomes obvious that "The
    > >> >> >> >> Far East" was never his target because assuming an all sea route in a
    > >> >> >> >> westerly direction, he left with insuffucient rations to makethe trip.

    >
    > >> >> >> > Columbus used a smaller value for the circumference of the Earth than
    > >> >> >> > the correct value,

    >
    > >> >> >> Smaller is an understatement as he missed it by more than 50%. *A
    > >> >> >> navigator who made mistakes like that would hardly have lasted as
    > >> >> >> long as he had or had a reputaion supposedly as good as his.

    >
    > >> >> >> > * * * * * * * * * * *even though other folks at the time had something
    > >> >> >> > quite close to the correct value.

    >
    > >> >> >> At the time? *Try more than 1400 years earlier.

    >
    > >> >> > Why does this matter?

    > > Because people forget. See above.

    >
    > People, as a whole, don't just forget. *And,a s I said above what the Greeks
    > knew in 100 BC was still being taught at the time of Columbus and is still
    > being taught today. *Nobody just forgot.
    >
    >
    >
    > >> >> >> > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Was this intentional on his part to
    > >> >> >> > make his plans sound more realistic, or did he really believe in the
    > >> >> >> > smaller value?

    >
    > >> >> >> Or did he have pre-knowledge of the existence of the North and South
    > >> >> >> American (although obviously not under that name) continents andmerely
    > >> >> >> bilked Ferdinand and Isabella into financing his boondogle to sewhat
    > >> >> >> was there!!

    > > Or did he want what was behind the box next to the beautiful Carol
    > > Maryl?

    >
    > Apparently King Ferdinand did because Columbus turned out to be just as
    > good a huckster as Monty Hall.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > >> >> > Or did he prefer dogs or cats? This is pure speculation. Maybe hedid?
    > >> >> > Maybe not. Is there any evidence at all to make what you suspect
    > >> >> > plausible?

    >
    > >> >> The known existence of a map showing the coastline of north and south
    > >> >> america. *The fact that he obviously knew the true circumference of
    > >> >> the earth. *The fact that he took just enough supplies to reach that
    > >> >> destination and way too little to actully reach India by traveling west.
    > >> >> Looks kinda like simple math to add them *up. *You do realize that
    > >> >> Spain wasn't the first place asked to fiannce this boondogle. *Others,
    > >> >> refused.
    > >> > CBS refused Star Trek in favor of Lost in Space!

    >
    > >> Isn't that like being offered a bag of horse manure or a bag of cow manure?

    > > Nope, and it's your loss.

    >
    > How is my belief that TV has been the biggest waste of scientific research
    > the earth has ever seen my loss? *I find much more productive things todo
    > with my time than to sit and gawk at "The vast wasteland".
    >
    >
    >
    > >> > So what great riches was he hoping to find in the Americas?

    >
    > >> Actually, I don't think greed was his motive. *I believe he wanted to
    > >> discover and explore a place he knew his European counterparts had never
    > >> seen. *But no one was going to finance that. *So he made up a an absurd
    > >> theory about reaching India and bilked Spain into financing it. *And
    > >> got called a hero for his effort.

    > > Well, I meant motive.
    > > Fine, so Bob K. came up with a poor example in your opinion. That
    > > doesn't necessarily invalidate his point, and I believe he had another
    > > example. Let's move on already.

    >
    > Consider the topic dropped.
    >
    > bill
    >
    > --
    > Bill Gunshannon * * * * *| *de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. *Three wolves
    > billg...@cs.scranton.edu | *and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    > University of Scranton * |
    > Scranton, Pennsylvania * | * * * * #include *- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -


    Correct: There were two basic kinds of people in 1492.

    1) Educated people who knew that Eratosthenes (200 BC) proved the
    Earth was round including its approximate size.

    2) Uneducated (but practical) people who lived by rules of thumb like
    "as you sail too far south, the North Start will disappear so you had
    better hug the coast". This last bit always worked when rounding the
    south of Africa but could not be used when crossing the Atlantic near
    (or south of) the equator.

    Neil Rieck
    Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,
    Ontario, Canada.
    http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/

  20. Re: OT: The end of the world in roughly 3 hours

    On Sep 19, 2:16 pm, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    > In article ,
    > koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
    >
    > > In article , Michael Kraemer writes:

    >
    > >> What were the costs to develop the theory of relativity ?
    > >> It just took a brilliant brain, a pencil and
    > >> (probably numerous) sheets of paper.

    >
    > > There was cost in performing the experiments that led to knowing
    > > we needed Einstein's theory. Not to mention him knowing what his
    > > theory had to explain.

    >
    > > There was cost in performing Columbus' experiement, too. Failed
    > > in his goal to reach the far east by sailing west. Failed
    > > experiments can be vitally important.

    >
    > Now there's a very good comparison. Columbus was a fraud or an idiot
    > who successfully sold snake oil to the king and queen of Spain. And
    > that is exactly how I see a lot of what passes for science today except
    > I have eliminated the possibility that the perps are idiots. (And,
    > in case your curious, I hold that Columbus was also no idiot. He was
    > however an exceptional fraud who suckered Spain into financing a
    > boondogle he knew could not deliver what he promised!!)
    >
    > bill
    >
    > --
    > Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
    > billg...@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    > University of Scranton |
    > Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include


    Bill,

    In (further!) defense of science:

    (Excerpted from

    http://www.randi.org/joom/swift/swif...008-2.html#i10

    )

    I mentioned in the piece on antibiotics how we need to celebrate
    science as well as point out pseudoscience. In that vein, I’d like to
    give a shout out to Science Daily. If you’re ever feeling like we’re
    losing the battle, a visit to www.sciencedaily.com might brighten your
    day a bit. It’s a chronicle of the progress science is making every
    day, and shows that despite what the mainstream media might portray,
    there are a lot of talented and dedicated people working to expand
    human knowledge. Just don’t pay too much attention to the Google ads;
    the contrast they offer shines a brighter light on why science is
    important.

    AEF

+ Reply to Thread
Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 LastLast