nec209

Gvernment ,private and NASA.Look it up on youtube there videos of this even on discovery channel. I don't even look at Russia any more there space program died after cold war. The space program in US and Russia died after the cold war and my prediction in 50 years we will not be sending people up into space AT ALL , but space probes , robots that can do it much CHEAPER. The lobbyist are hard at work on this now.That me say this again lobbyist are hard at work .In 50 years we will not be sending people up .The lobbyist will see to it. It too costly to go in space. space mining and space colony will NEVER HAPPEN to the space cost is lower by 50%.

There is not much more for improvement with chemical that why they are turning to laser and fission and in the future fussion. Well laser propulsion needs gigawatt power.The ground shines a laser beam to the craft to get it to go up.Other type of laser propulsion the craft shines a laser beem and it heats up the air and causes ther craft to go up. The last type is pulse laser the craft rides on pulse of the laser going on and off very fast..If the craft use pulse laser or laser propulsion where it shines a laser beam and it heats up the air you will need a floating power station.This not a problem for the ground that has its own power station. Well space mining and space colony is scfi has we do not have the technology to lower space cost by 50%. It is not the technology it is the cost with technology why we are not doing it.We have the technology now for space mining and space colony it is the technology is too costly. When space cost dropped by 50% than space mining and space colony will take off big time.

I think Asia is the best for robotics and electronic stuff and European hospitals are more advanced when comes to stem cell. The US hospitals are old and very out dated other than some hospitals run by universities or handful of mostly private hospitals that are very costly .

Explain the pros and cons of laser propulsion before stabing me.I thought 300 feet is highest it gone up or some thing like that .Do you think in 50 or 100 years from now we will be using laser propulsion. What is the engineering problems with laser propulsion .Has anyone made it go up higher than 300 feet? No idea what you talking about here.

Okay I thought you where saying nuclear can take up 2 times the payload than now.So 10% of it's weight of payload not like 5% of it's weight of payload now.

Why is it all replies in this thread has nothing to so with my post? The thread subject was country has the most state of the art health care?

Yes I hear European hospitals are more advanced when comes to stem cell.I hear people going to Europe for stem cell treatment.Also bacterial resistance is major problem and doctors in Europe are taking a radical move to use virus to kill the resistance bacterial . When it comes to robotics and electronic stuff well Asia is the best. Many hospitals in Canada and US are old very old the new hospitals build no more than 5 years ago or hospitals run by universities do more scfi stuff like new drugs ,cloning ,stem cell and new treatments.Well the other hospitals get it 10 years later. There was program on TV of person in a vegetable state and they used electrical pulse and over time the body stated to work .There was study of turning fat cells into heart cells and was inserted into person heart.And if that is not interesting enough there was show on discovery of person who had brain aneurysm there was no treatment do to the size and location of the aneurysm it would bleed to death the person. One a radical move they cooled the body down very cold the person was dead and did the operation than resuscitated. There has been other stuties of people in freezing water and was in for long time and person resuscitated.The cold prevents brain cells from dying or other cells and slow the body down. Other very interesting thing on discovery they gave mice a gas and it made them go to sleep and than remove the gas and they woke up .No idea what the gas is but in the show they say in future a person that has gun shots or stabbing they can give person this gas to slow the body down .I think this the research going into hibernation.Well hibernation like in scfi on going on long space mission or putting person in hibernation and than 400 years in future wake them up is still very much scfi now .But they doing research on smaller scale a person in hibernation for short time. One of the big problems is icce crystals if the person is frozen for a long time. But there is more study going into people and animals frozen and than resuscitated but has of now the longer the person or animals is frozen the harder it is to resuscitate the person. I'm just saying only a handful mostly private hospitals that are very costly in the US or hospitals run by universities are using cutting edge.Some of best cancer treatment in Canada are in Toronto trying new treatment.Some new hospitals built in Toronto they put in all state of the art at the time of building and the best in Canada at the time of building.

I thought you where saying nuclear uses 8% to 10% of it's weight of payload not like 4% to 5% of it's weight of payload now.So nuclear is 2 times more more fuel efficient than what it is now.And can take up 2 times the payload .

What country has the most state of the art health care like advanced technology,stem cell ,cloning ,bioengineering ,robotic,advanced surgery so on. I hear the the biggest problem is cost ,getting specialists ,training for new medical stuff , getting new state of the art technology so on.And the US and Canada is not doing well when comes to this only some private very expensive cancer treatment centers ,surgery so on .in the US .Where one must get on plane to fly to that city. I hear that India and Singapore are very good.When it comes to research and doing studies I think most 98% is still done in the US, What is wrong with China or India ?

What do you think is going hapen to the heathcare in Canada in the next 5 years? Is it going get batter or worse?

So with nuclear 8% of the weight is its payload not like 4% like now? Do to it is more fuel efficient and takes less fuel. So it is 2 times more fuel efficient than what it is now?

You cannot see some thing that is not matter or have no mass. So yes we cannot see energy or photons has they have no mass thus no matter. And there is no light at the subatomic world has you say the wavelength of light is not on that scale. I think I got it now.

So you saying that fission propulsion the core and engine can be 5 times bigger ?The big engine is not the problem has it is more fuel efficient and takes less fuel. It does very little to help if the fuel is 50% less than what it is now to get into space and the engine is so big.Your bedroom will be bigger than the space capsule !!! The system we have now allows for a bigger capsule than this. And the majority of the weight here is the core the engine . What do you mean here?

Your post is hard to understand has I do not know how this works .There is not more one book.

You going get alot of flak posting that here by members..

If there will ever be a pill .Well medication works well for chemicals it does very bad for matter like tissue or cells that gets damage. Has medication does not heal it is are young youth who think that medication can heal/repair tissue ,cells or organs.

What do you mean? I thought the core and shielding would make it very big so payload would be more of problem with fission than chemical propulsion .

So you saying photons have no mass thus no matter and that is why we cannot see each photon under a electron microscope ?

No your eye will not see each photon has the photons must enter your eye and your eye is not built for the subatomic world.And with electron microscope we can see protons ,neutrons, ectrons so why not photons.And photons are the light . It is only when x number of photons enter your eye we can see light .If some how only 5 photon enter your eye now ,you would not see any thing .Are eye are not built to see subatomic particles.It is only when X number of subatomic particles do we see a shape or object of matter. Are eyes are not sensitive to see each photon it is only when x number enter are eye do we see light..

Exactly no .There is working model for the above propulsion but there is problems that need to be fixed to make it practical.NASA has done experiments on most of the above but little money they get, it normaly does not get funded for more than 4 or 5 years of research. Well negetive energy,levitation,anti-gravity, megnetic propulsion is Science fiction has there is no model on that at all .Basacly we don't know if it is real or not well the above is real.Understand scfi is some thing that is not real not a scientific problem And that is just wrong fussion is not scfi they are trying to get controlled fussion it only last for second and there is more input than out put.It may be 20,50 or 100 years before we get fussion .But fussion is not some red crystal used in starship 535d . Again with nanotubes you can build towers almost in space .The space elevator is possible with nanotechnology.But if snap it be very bad.

Well are eyes are not made to see particles .Your desk you looking at now well you eyes cannot see every particle it is when there are billions than you can see it and it looks like desk.Think of a computer monitor every dot on your screan you cannot see the dots but those millions dots make up the picture .Now if you had special eyeglasses you would see every don't not the picture of the monitor has the magnification would be very big so you would see every dot.

Not true you cannot be atheist and get in government no one will vote for you .Look at the abortion and separation of church and state debate !! The teaching of god in school and prayer in school.Also gays and lesbians and the evolution debate in schools.The nedia use of god we trust and other quotes so on and so on like god bless America It like that in Canada and the US.No Christians are not happy to leave it at home and the church. They are the fundamentalists not the 90% of Muslim . What I'm saying is all religion is like that and clash with separation of church and state .You seem to paint that Christians are the only people that do not clash and this is not true.

I have been having discusses about different propulsion system looking for ways to bring the space cost down. And after looking at the different propulsion system it seems chemical propulsion is the only option --- Anti-matter ( very very very costly (way more than chemical propulsion) cannot be controlled or stored has fuel. Also hard to make you have smash atoms and it only last for second or so the anti-matter If there was breakthrough where we can make lots and lots of anti-matter very cheap and can control it and store it and use it has fuel it be banned for use in , earth thus only used for deep space has a size of rock would destroy all of New York. It would be banned in earth and close to earth. ---Ion propulsion or plasma propulsion does not have the thrust to lift any thing to space ( must be used for deep space only) ----microwave propulsion very bad on the person health. I would think this is banned for use too . ---fusion propulsion no point talking about this to we get working fusion but you need big core and would have to be very big so payload may be a problem. ---fission not sure have not read much on it. But I would think the core and shielding would make it very big and space would be tight so payload would be a problem more so than chemical propulsion . --Laser propulsion there is different types of Laser propulsion . one type people at the ground shine a laser beam to the craft to get it to go up , other type the craft shines a laser beam that heats up the air and the craft goes up. The last type is pulse laser the craft rides on pulse of the laser going on and off very fast. From what I read there is some problems with laser propulsion you need gigawatt power well find for the ground if (ground shine a laser beam to the craft but the other propulsion the craft in the air shines a laser beem you need flying power station if the craft in the air shines a laser beam that heats up the air so it goes up. Also it could be very costly and also 300 feet is the highest we got a craft to go up than came down so it is along ways off to getting into space. --- space elevator I don't see this happing if the cable snap it would cut any thing in path around the earth. ---Ion lifers work by having 2 electrodes one at the top and one at the bottom .There is high voltage at the top electrode that ionizes the air and the ions are strongly attracted to the downwards electrode , the ions rushing downwards impinges on air molecules causes upward force . Problem is no one has done experiments on Ion lifers ---chemical propulsion not sure but may be they can improved it What are the pros and cons ? And problems they have to overcome to the above propulsion system. In the end it looks like the space program is doomed, seriously the space program is seriously flawed only 3 countries can put people into space it cost money like a leaking faucet and we are hardly done any think in past 20 years of the space program other than build the ISS !!!! And what go up into space every month or two !!! If the space program is going to have any chance of getting any where you have to go up in space 2 or 3 times a month and quadruple the space program or even more than what we have now. I'm not saying bring the cost down for $2,000 per person or taking up 40 people at time has this is pure scfi talking and we are billion and billion of light years from that level of technology if at all . But if the cost came down by 50% less yes just 50% less to get into space now , and 5 or 8 countries can put people into space and the private sector can pull it of and profit that this is worth having a major party. Has of now it is a joke only 3 countries can put people into space and most of the time do not even have monthly launches. It cost like a leaking faucet. And it does not look like any of the propulsion is going work and shine light at the end of the tunnel . It does not look like there is any propulsion system out there that will work other than chemical propulsion but is very very very costly and limited by a payload problem. I was hoping of the above propulsion system talk about here that fusion, fission propulsion or laser propulsion may be the answer to the problem in 50 or 100 years from now. What is your thought? And pros and cons on the propulsion system.

When computers get faster and better than virtual reality will go from scfi to reality.

Eye-Popping Microscope Images ( 10 photos 1 of 10) http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Eye-Popping-Microscope-Images/ss/events/sc/111810bioscapesimage#photoViewer=/ydownload/20101118/photos_net_web_sc/1290096617 ( 4 of 10) http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Eye-Popping-Microscope-Images/ss/events/sc/111810bioscapesimage#photoViewer=/ydownload/20101118/photos_net_web_sc/1290096675 Note is this new technology that shows more detail than ever before ? Even parts of cells ? If so than do you think one day we can look at energy or each photon of light?