beecee

New theories and discoveries are checked and re-appraised...even GR today still needs to make successful predictions and continue to match new observations to be accepted. Those theories that do that best are accepted by the majority. With your ether and field theory inference, the ether was simply invalidated with the Michelson Morley experiment. But being a rank amateur at this game, I decided to do some searching for you. https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/308413/ether-vs-quantum-field-theory "I think what distinguishes quantum field theory, where each elementary particle in the particle table defines a field all over space time, from the luminiferous aether is Lorenz invariance. The luminiferous aether theory was falsified by the Michelson Morley experiment because it was not Lorenz invariant. In quantum field theory an electron traversing space time is described by a quantum mechanical wave packet (which means that what "waves" is the probability of existing at (x, y, z, t)), manifested by creation and annihilation operators acting on the electron field, and the expectation value defines the location of the electron as a function of (x, y, z, t). The same for a photon, riding on the photon field. The quantum fields though by construction are Lorenz invariant and thus cannot be identified with the luminiferous aether". ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Or maybe I have misunderstood your question.

Not me. But irrespective, once again, given enough time [and luck] why should not and why would not some of these things be built? What if in say a 1000 years, some sort of new physics was discovered that enabled us to approach "c": I mentioned back earlier in the peace, that "given time" all that is not forbidden by the laws of physics and GR, are possible for a sufficiently advanced civilisation. Sure some seem far fetched and as you say, certainly science fiction but...... Today's science fiction [ in many cases] is tomorrow's science fact.

Hi Ken...Let's not go over old ground again, but can I ask you a couple of questions? What sort of time frame are you putting on the problems you foresee and when and if they can be resolved with greater and better technology? The foreseeable future I have heard some people say...so what do you see as the foreseeable future? How far ahead are you looking? 100 years?1000 years? 5000years? a million years? Do you see what I'm getting at? My point again is that given time, [and a bit of luck in surviving some of the worst case scenarios we can envisage] why would not space science continue as it should.

No probs. I was proceeding under the assumption that this and other "worst case scenarios" would be alleviated, and that we did survive such events.

As Area54 has said, is pretty well correct imo. What is important is our definition of "nothing". Is the quantum foam hypothetically from whence the BB arose nothing? In my opinion, pretty damn close! Are virtual particles nothing? Here is a hypothetical account of what is sometimes referred to as the Universe being the ultimate free lunch, or a universe from nothing. https://www.astrosociety.org/publications/a-universe-from-nothing/

If I have offended anyone, I apologise, but by the same token those that seem to oppose space exploration, are known to make counter claims for the proponents of continued and extended space exploration and lack of concern for those less fortunate then you or I... It certainly does not make me "feel good" though, rather bemused and sometimes sad that those opposing such inevitability, seem to have short memories and misinterpretation of the benefits that are achieved. I don't believe they have a really large support base anyway, although there are certainly a large percentage that are simply uninformed and rather nonchalant, and disinterested in such events. I remember after Apollo 11 astronauts returned to Earth and the deserved public fanfare they recieved, and how that quickly reigned back even before Apollo 12 got off the ground. It actually took a near disaster with Apollo 13 and the very real danger that Astronauts could be lost to revive the same interest as there was with Apollo 11. Ask some ordinary folk how many times NASA went to the Moon...or how many men have walked on the Moon. I don't discount the variable economic circumstances. What I am trying to say is that while there may be legitimate reason for any limited hiatus in space exploration now, that probably will not be the case in the future and that better times could be ahead. And I hold global warming as an important problem that certainly should be dealt with appropriatley...but why pick on science...or space science in particular? I also cringe and sometimes am emotionally affected at some of the more ghastly and cruel examples of man against fellow man that appears to happen so regularly. Then again we are living in an age of multi communication methodology that wasn't available when I was a kid, not to mention of course how the media can certainly boost their sales of that particular media with accounts of world wide disasters, rather then some incredible scientific advancement in medicine, chemistry, physics and how that is improving our lot. Finally as I have mentioned in every post, I do not put a time frame on any aspect of space exploration, and have stipulated the fact that all I have mentioned will be achieved if we can overcome our Earthly follies and avoid any "chance encounter" with an asteroid and/or comet. Thanks for your realistic view and support, and I will try and take your advice re getting folk upset and taking an intransigent position in all of this. You do make a point that I should consider.

Let me say before anyone attempts to jump down my throat and accuse me of disregarding the many people today in the world still suffering, hunger, famine, exploitation and even torture under questionable regimes. My wife and I have for the last 6 years sponsored a child through World Vision, and still currently do. Even though now retired, I still contribute to various charities, [Surf Lifesaving, House with no steps just to name two...... I cringe at times at the injustices that some in under developed parts of the world suffer, so I do what little I personally can, and hope that in time, humanity in general, will co-operate to alleviate such cruelty and injustices, and that money is directed world wide away from comparing military arsenals and general "cock waving" to such morally just causes, but to even suggest that money be diverted from space science stinks of hypocrisy at worst and short-sightedness at best imo. My only advice to the powers that be in all countries, is that the inevitable continuation of space exploration, be a combined International effort. I am also realistic enough to understand that in this day and age, and with the incredible technological knowhow, that in most cases of space exploration, the emphasis will be on robotic craft, bio engineering and artificial intelligence, paving the way...particularly to anything beyond the solar system. When proper and all encompassing safety protocols and devices have been implemented, then the likes of Gagarin, Glenn, Valentina Tereshkova, Armstrong, Aldrin, can make their mark for all mankind. Exploration, space or otherwise anywhere, will not be stopped by any bleeding heart sob stories, or political opportunist or any possible variable economic circumstance.

And yet we still spend trillions of dollars in militaristic endeavours, despite these more urgent problems you speak of. I smell hypocrisy. Why is it premature? Who can forecast when some giant asteroid/comet will not be dislodged from the Oort cloud or Asteroid belt to collide with us? What are these goals you speak of? Hunger, famine etc in the world today? Let's extract some of the trillions from the money spent by all nations in military endeavours. In my own country a huge 4 week naval/army/ and air force exercise has just been conducted with the NZ and USA forces. I wonder how much this cost? Wouldn't that have been put to better use? So why rant on against science and the science of space travel and exploration, that will certainly benefit all mankind despite your rather fragile pessimistic views to the contrary? Like I said, it will continue and will not nor should not be stopped, ceased or reigned in over the long run. Given the time of course.

Here's a more detailed answer....... https://www.quora.com/Is-orbital-free-fall-what-we-normally-mean-by-falling "It's falling in the sense that the only force acting on you is gravity. As the equivalence principle puts forward, there is no way to tell (locally) whether you are falling or floating freely in space under such conditions (that is, the only force acting on you is gravity).As you correctly point out, it's not falling in the sense of "getting closer to the Earth", but there is an intuitive way to think about this. When we typically "fall" we're just going straight down---the distance we move is precisely how much closer to the surface of the Earth we get. But we could also imagine someone falling who also is moving sideways. The distance she moves is a combination of her sideways motion and her downwards motion. Once we get far up enough and fast enough (sideways) we run into a problem: the Earth isn't flat! As we fall "down" the Earth curves away beneath us! (This is because we are moving sideways---to a place where the Earth is curving in this fashion). So being in orbit is just a delicate balance of moving fast enough sideways that the distance we're falling downward is exactly compensated by the distance the Earth curves away from us."

Why would you say that? Ignorance of the fact that any orbital body is actually in free fall perhaps?

The ISS has been continually and permanently occupied now for near 17 years from 2000.That fact is testament to the determination and courage of man to continue space endeavours. 17 NASA Astronauts have died in various missions to continue the inevitable, difficult and dangerous exploration of the solar system, the galaxy and the universe....Many Russians have also died for the same cause. I certainly do not see any logic or common sense in claims or demands that space science, and space exploration should or will cease, for the many reasons I and others have given, and see any abandonment as crazy in the extreme. At the risk of boring the nay sayers and their negativity, and pessimism, let me say again, I personally have not put any time frame on any aspect of space endeavours, whether space mining, going back to the Moon, establishing an outpost, Putting man on Mars, or even further more bold missions...Simply, I say that all these things will be done, in time, as long as we avoid any catastrophic astronomical collision that wipes out the human race, and our own follies here on Earth. That gives us 3 billion years or thereabouts. Can any one here really say that we will not have set foot on Mars, or gone back to the Moon, or progressed further afield in that time frame?....Even 1 billion years! Even 1 million years! or even more realistically a 1000 years! My only wish is that we can get to Mars before I kick the bucket, which at a pinch must be within the next 25 years, and some extraordinary evidence to surface to show that ETL does exist elsewhere.

History has demonstrated that it is inevitable: Even the church in the dark ages could not curtail science and progress for too long. What you seem to be avoiding is that optimism is what is necessary for achievement, certainly not pessimistic negativity. Economics and political climate do change, over time.....but again irrespective, space exploration will certainly continue and a man on Mars will almost certainly take place, and in time further afield and more bold missions of the like of outposts as we do in Antarctica. History has also showed that. Profit [or a lack thereof] has nothing to do with it....Profit will not stop science and space exploration from continuing...it may hinder and slow it down at times, but in the end, it will continue. We are not born to stagnate on this fart arse little blue orb, just as we were not born to continue swinging in the trees...the "use by date" of Earth will esure our continued progress, given the time of course...probably around 3 billion years.

Whatever those capabilities are, whatever the political and economic scenario maybe, those and the technology will be achieved in time. A point you and others have avoided. In essence whatever the pros I put on this forum, and whatever the cons you have put, space exploration and off earth habitation is inevitable...in time.

My mind is open but not so open that my brains have or will fall out.

Yes, incredible how someone who has been shown to have the facts wrong [reusable rocket technology] can still focus their insecurities, negativity, and pessimism on even more nonsensical reasoning. Nice post, although I see it as grossly down playing the beneficial side and exploiting some of the questionable negativity side. Sure it's expensive, sure it's difficult, sure it's got a large degree of uncertainty, but just as surely, humanity is not going to stay glued to planet Earth...Its out there, and we will in time go. Notice my oft mention phrase "In time"....I don't know when we will visit another star system, I don't know when we will land man on Mars, but if we can survive any potential catastrophic astronomical event, and if we are able to survive our own follies here on Earth, there is nothing more certain that we will achieve most of those goals I have mentioned. The greatest inhibitor in taking man to Mars or beyond is I believe radiation: A big problem that that they are now working on. Earth also obviously has a "use by date" probably around 3 billion years or so, so again most certainly we will need to have spread our seed beyond our Earthly confines. That of course will be done...Progress will not be stopped and spacefaring and exploration is the way to go

According to evidence from WMAP, the universe is flat to within small error bars, but those error bars maybe hiding the fact that the "flatness" is just the arc of a tremendously larger circle and that the universe is "closed" and finite, but just like Earth, has no real boundary, or limitation to how far one could go. A torus shape could I imagine also be envisaged. I suppose the definition of boundary is important here.

Perhaps you need to listen to everyone, because really what you have said, is jumbled nonsense.

As I tried to convey to you before, after you claimed that reusable rockets was "not come to be" It's only early days yet, and again, in time all you have raised will be second nature. Let me ask you a few questions. Would you have cancelled the Apollo program after Grissom, White, and Chaffee perished in the fire that engulfed their capsule? Would you have ceased any attempts to put Satellites into orbit and testing rockets after WW2? You do realize the great benefits that Satellites have given all mankind don't you? I mean they have benefited agriculture, meteorology, GPS, just for starters. Why do you appear so negative and pessimistic about the future, particularly with regards to space, the solar system and beyond? I'm not really interested in [and I don't believe science is either] whether millionare class, middle class, or lower class, tourists will ever take advatage of going to the Moon and/or Mars and beyond. The first priority is science, exploration, and outposts.......If and when tourism takes effect, all well and good. Worth noting also that there are many people today that cannot afford to travel from the Americas to Australia and vice versa...or for that matter, any form of air travel...You do understand that, don't you?

Perhaps you have been hiding under a rock somewhere? http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/26/elon-musk-instagrammed-a-video-of-his-spacex-rocket-landing.html Obviously early days yet, but its a very promising start. Again in time all that you are questioning will be achieved and more. The many billions and billions of dollars spent are worth it and will bring great benefit to mankind in general.

Some of those questions have been scientifically answered and explained...... In the meantime here is a short 7.5 minute video

Science is a discipline in eternal progress. There are many many young and experienced scientists out there, that are testing Einstein's GR every day, as well as most other current accepted scientific data. That is the name of the game.

Wow!!! Your assumptions are nothing short of amazing. I'm saying again, that space endeavours and explorations will continue in spite of some of the negative pessimistic attitudes of some..... I'm saying that humanities primitive need to explore and go where no man has gone before, will not be stopped. I'm saying that those that are crying and wringing their hands over the incredible costs of space travel and exploration, need to consider the trillions of dollars spent world wide on military endeavours. I'm saying that while that is expensive, that expense can be alleviated to some extent by a International effort. I'm saying that progress is not going to be stopped. I'm saying that political and economic climates will and do change. I'm saying that Given the time, man will progress: To the Moon, to Mars, and to the stars. Given the time, man could I believe, achieve anything that is not forbidden by the laws of physics and GR...Given the time. I;m not talking of space tourists as such although that probably in time , will take place, just as in time permanent settlements off this planet will take place, despite the bleeding hearts and their fragile opposition to such..

double post: sorry

Not all primitive urges are undesirable: Let's all be grateful that humanity as a whole, still sees the need to explore, discover new worlds, and push the limits of boundaries. We would still be in the dark ages if we didn't. Sci/Fi may down play the costs and difficulties, science does not but considering the trillions of dollars world wide spent on military objectives, the small amount put aside for science and getting us further into space, is a drop in the Ocean. Yes, we certainly do have our Priorities arse up! No illusion at all: Science knows full well the dangers and difficulties involved, as well as the benefits to be obtained. Whose ingenuity? and what limitations? Given the time, man will progress: To the Moon, to Mars, and to the stars. Given the time, man could I believe, achieve anything that is not forbidden by the laws of physics and GR...Given the time. Political and economic climates change over time: What is not economically viable today, maybe tomorrow. Economic benefits, along with technological benefits, international and general good will among other nations, new industries are all bound to benefit from our inevitable progress and yes, habitation in time of the solar system and beyond. Quote time: "No pessimist ever discovered the secret of the stars, or sailed to an uncharted land, or opened a new doorway for the human spirit". Helen Keller: "There is no sadder sight than a young pessimist". Mark Twain:

Well at least you get a point for recognising it as gobbldydook, because really it just plainly lacks any common sense and gobblydook is all it is.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibberish Gibberish, jibberish, jibber-jabber, and gobbledygook refer to speech or other use of language that is nonsense, or what the listener believes to be nonsense. But hey, if that's what you want to take to the grave, be my guest! Don't let me rain on your parade.