Pseudoswallo

Well, that really seems much preferable. I'd like to see how this works out, do you have a link? My only issues with this are the environmental impact and the possible long-term effect on the moon's orbit (as if). I might even try to install my own next summer.

I assume when you reffer to this as "new" technology and the "first working plant", you are not including those already installed and working stations in Annapolice Royal (since '84) and Rance (completed in '66)?

I have to agree, that is pretty sweet.

Ugh, I've always been bad at these things. I can't tell you the answer, but I'll do my best to help. Firstly, when you say "as freely as possible", does that mean no resistance? Otherwise, we need more specs. I think that you then have to dicover the boyancy of the object, subtract that from the accell. due to gravity, and do something with the area under a graph...? Ok, so that was totally unhelpful. Sorry about that.

According to Einstien, the all observes have the right to consider themselves at rest, thus there is no paraadox in the arrow question. Other than that, the 5th sentance is just BS. sorry about spelling, crudeness, and whatever, but I'm in a rush

I generally read one or two books, finishing them in about a week, and a host of up to two-score other books that I read "when I can find them". When I find a book that I really enjoy, it can be gone in a weekend, as long as it is under 2k pages. More than that, and I begin to become tired of the story line, and have to switch off to another one. I also find myself developing alternate stories/endings during my spare time or dreams.

True, it has given us an advantage, even when we're deprived of our precious technology. However, it seems to me that there's still some evolution left in regards to our cognitive ability, because we seem about to think ourselves out of existence (BOOM!).

All that I've ever done to this effect is to stand up, walk around, etc. This gets the blood flowing to the brain, which (under my own testing) is shown to increace the speed at which one can do simple math problems. Oh, and noto... welcome to SFN, and may you surpass even the good Cap'n in posting and intellect.

I don't know if this helps at all, but I'm kind of on a time budget (doen't that make me look considerate). To accelerate to the spped of the exhaust takes approx. 1.7 times the mass of the ship, which isn't too bad. However, if we are unable to increase the velocity tof the propellant, we must increase the mass. To accelerate to twice the propellant's speed, however, takes 6.4 times the mass of the ship. With a chemical roket, this brings us up to 0.00003 the speed of light (I don't know if that includes accelerating the propellent itself). Excited yet?

Did any of You hear about the guy who built a trebuchet and used it to fling himself and his friends ito large bodies of water? If I find where I read that, I'll post it. (for those of you that read Scott Adams, ffffttt-ffffttt! and weasles away)

I tried to build a balista once... what a miserable faliure. It was less effective than the pine-branch bows I made at 8. However, if you should make it work, I'd love to hear about it.

OUCH! That's a lot of paint! However, there must be something they can do to solve the foam problems. It really is getting quite repetitive, and I'd hate to see the space program halted over something as (seemingly) trivial as that.

Possible, in my opinion, but EXTREAMLY unlikely... that could explain the 'big bang', a scientific singularity under the current system. Personally, I would just make a few "bags of holding" and sell them for exorbinant prices:D