nec209

I mean that every living thing emits electromagnetic waves of all wavelengths. So do the non living things.

I know but I wanted some one to elaborate on that.

What do you mean by every living thing emits electromagnetic waves of all wavelengths.

these detect the electrical impulses that emanate from your body. sure, they're pretty weak but they are there.

 

and its DC signals in our nerves. if there isn't AC or DC then there isn't electricity because all they mean is whether the current of electricity is monodirectional or bidirectional.

I thought it was some different type of electricity .

With out nerve cells the body is like a rock and does not work.You need the nerve cells to control the muscle . Your brain sends electric signals down the nerve to tell your muscle to walk or move your hand .

To go to the bathroom your brain sends electric signals down the nerve too to open the bladder.

There was program on TLC of man got is had cut off the doctors had to hook up his nerves and every thing else but even than it was NOT 100% good.

The truble is nerve cells and electric signals in the spin is so different they do not know how to fix this or re-hook it up like a cut off had or foot.

I don't think any living matter on earh emits a electromagnetic wave.I know the human body runs on electricity but I think it is other type of electricity than DC or AC a more electric pulse.

Sorry people who believe in Atlantis there is no frame work for crystals and electromagnetic waves to fight diseases and illness but there is a frame work for stem cell, cloning ,genetic engineering ,nanotechnology ,cyborg and 3D printing .Most of this stuff 50 or 100 years out but at these there is a frame work .

The myth of lost city Atlantis using crystals ,electromagnetic waves , types of water and power crystals no frame work.:eek:I do not think zapping the body with electric current or electromagnetic wave is going to do much.

As a film it was ok; plenty of action scenes and the specila effects where good. But from a science point of view, I don't think I've seen a film that is so far from the truth in my life! Top marks to the main characters for out running a Yellowstone pyroclastic flow though...thats got to be a 100m dash world record

Yes but most people not scientist think that 2012 is it .Most 95 % of people on earth ( exceptions of higher number of agnostics and atheist in Europe and communist countries ) thing there is god and devil, good and evile .

A forumla means nothing. One can make a forumla for anti-gravity space ship or plasma gun but if you cannot test it and built it for the mass and have a working prototype that means nothing.

There is enough goof balls on the national graphics channel and discovery who claim they can make anti-gravity and when science team comes it does not work.

Now what to I make of the UFO's and ghost on national graphics channel and discovery that claim it is true or the mass of people that are not scientist that believe it, I watched a program on the national graphics channel of a bridge being built and had some problems and the construction workers would not work has they thought there was some evile do to the bad luck .Or the life in the ER on TLC and person came in with a medical problem do to voodo and going crazy in the ER.

What about Ripleys believe it or not !!! Or Guinness world records :eek:

Ya claims of one being under-water for a long time or days and days with out food or water Or walking on stones or hot fire or pushing a big tuck so on.

There is 2 things one is called science and the other called unexplained mysteries .

boy Meditating without drinking and eating for morethan 10 month (4/5)

Part 5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X0gums7Vz4

Note there is different parts to the video ( so I'm not going to post the URL for every part.

I was reading some where about a artificial liver or artificial kidney . About test subjects given artificial liver or artificial kidney and saying in 5 or 10 years it may make it way to hospitals for people who have problems with the liver or kidney .

I do not know where I found this article and so I'm trying to find it I do not know if this true or not or they are doing research into it how to make a artificial liver or artificial kidney .

I do not read the scientific journals or popular science has I do not know enough about biology to know where to start.

And do you think there where be drug to reverse aging or dead or dmage tissure?

I mean may be there may be a drug for tissure that is not so healthy but dead or dmage tissure is big leep.

Even kids know that a requirement for science is that it be repeatable. So if a scientist finds a study and finds it hard to believe, they repeat the study and if they don't get the same result they publish a paper contradicting the other study. This is especially true for controversial or "controversial" studies, and the journalists have extra fun publishing these repeatedly while leaving out all the important details. But in reality, most studies are for new things.

And I'm sure this is happing with controversial study of EMF and electricity like high power line. But the WHO and media are not saying this and that is what is making me bad.

So, you're only OK with taking time to understand things if that time was in the past?

What do you mean? I just take all new studies with grain of salt to there is repeatable studies and no debates in the science world.If in next 3 days a group of studies say eating bread cause cancer I'm going be skeptical.If you want to believe new studies or 3 or 4 studies go and believe it.

And any thing that is controversial or deabtes in the science world I just turn that out and say they don't have a clue to there is no controversial or deabtes going on .

News flash: there's ALWAYS going to be some important topic that we don't yet know the answer too. Complaining that we're in the middle of studies won't get you anywhere.

Where did I say they where in middle ? People have only really been using cell phones big for past 15 years tops . May be it is the chemicals the plastic , the bad food , being really fat , the environment or bad genes and all this can cause flaws in the studies .

So, how do you know what factors to control for? Prior studies. And what happens when you design one of the 20-year-long studies you favor, then 10 years into it someone points out a factor that you couldn't possible have known about 10 years ago, that's only been discovered recently due to technological advances?

Here is thing cancer is really hard to find out has it takes long long long time . You have to take people and tell them to live in controlled environment. It like smoking:eek: well smoking does not = cancer it just over time you could get cancer or not . Some people smoke to 90 and not get cancer.

People eat all types of food how are you going say group A all you going to do is eat this and group C all you going to do is eat this and so on? It may take 40 or 50 years or more to the person gets cancer.

There so many factors does person using cell phone lay around watch TV all day and play computer games , does person walk and work out , does the person live in city or country , does person smoke or drink ,does person eat bad foods is there genetic flaws , does person do drugs , is the person fat or slim and any other elements that may = flaws .

Other thing is one thing may not = cancer but you need 2 or 3 things like smoking ,drinking and bad foods or cell phone , bad food and lazy person that does not walk or work out.This going make the study that much harder to do.

Other thing is stress and how well the immune system works. Does the person that use cell phone get stress out and is mad alot. May be people that are not stress out and mad alot and get proper sleep have better immune system and do not get cancer when smoking or using a cell phone.

Some people cancer runs alot in the family and people that live by high-way and inner city may be very bad for you.There are so many elements that may = a bad study. And the last time I check there is always shortage of money for research.

That me tell you one thing in past 100 years we change evolution from type food we eat , in bubble of electronics and lack of walking and working out , material and products that was not around 100 years ago and now obesity ,diabetes ,cancer and heart disease exploded. And scientist are trying find cure and find out want is causing all of this.

So, your idea is just "more"? And if "more" doesn't solve it? If we need to actually address dozens of confounding factors that are each only revealed by a subsequent study?

No science is about studies and the more studies and longer studies it is proven fact . We had over 100 years to prove too much x-rays and gama rays are bad .Go back in time to 1920 and scientist will be scraching their head. When smoking was link to cancer the scientist where scraching their head. Now many scientist have done studies and is on every page cover every where.When nuclear power came around scientist at that time did not undestand the health risk.Over time they had much better understanding of the health risk.

If there was no studies or experiments than science would be speculation. Most science may start out has theory and prove the theory by doing studies or experiments to prove theory true or not.

And what if one of your studies has a fatal flaw in it's design? You just put all your eggs in one basket, now have no good information, and just flushed $30,000,000 down the toilet (because yes, large scale medical studies cost that much).

I don't think we need to talk about flaws in studies has everyone knows it here and most GOOD and I say again most GOOD scientist will factor in other elements of the study like food ,environment ,genetic flaws , age and so on.

Frankly, this whole thread boils down to you having a temper tantrum like a whining, impatient toddler

Science takes time, and answering a question fully often takes multiple studies. Deal with it, or go live in a cave

That me tell you some think I wiil gamble by life in 50 or 100 years tops the debade over EMF and electricity will be over.

Just like we understand AC ,DC , induction ,flying faster than the speed sound ,x-rays and gama rays ,rockets ,flying ,smoking ,bad food ,nuclear power . We understand this so well it is on every page cover and every scientist had chance to do studies and experiments to prove it wrong.And in the future we may ever do more studies and experiments to make these things work better and understand it more.

I don't know if you are kid or not and I don't want sound rude here but scientist most always do studies and experiments to prove or disprove other scientist and I hear it all the time .If there was study in next 4 days that eating bread may cause cancer than other scientist will say wow and do studies and experiments to prove true or not .

Alot of times the problem is lack of money when doing studies and experiments and only have the money to do the studies and experiments for 2 or 3 years or do not have enough money to have more test subjects or lack of money for computers and such. Other times some scientist are faster at doing studies and experiments and other times other scientist spend more time doing studies and experiments .Some times there is flaws in studies like leaving out other elements of the study like food ,environment ,genetic flaws so on.

I think it started with the title, "This is what makes me so sick about scientist today," followed by actual bashing of science.

I'm not going to debate on the interpretation of thread has you or anyone can believe has you want.

"science today is not about facts but short studies" shows a misunderstanding of what science is. Science is not merely a body of facts; science is a process. It's very important how the data are collected and how the questions are asked and answered. And the simple truth is that many aspects of scientific inquiry start with a small experiment or study, to see if a more extensive experiment is warranted. So while it may have been inadvertent, you did bash science.

I explain to the poster above want alot times the problem is.

Alot of times the problem is lack of money when doing studies and experiments and only have the money to do the studies and experiments for 2 or 3 years or do not have enough money to have more test subjects or lack of money for computers and such. Other times some scientist are faster at doing studies and experiments and other times other scientist spend more time doing studies and experiments .Some times there is flaws in studies like leaving out other elements of the study like food ,environment ,genetic flaws so on.

Over time alot those these above are worked out over time.

Further, a response about detoxing from meth is completely inappropriate, even in response to a strongly-worded opinion. Disagree with the opinion if you wish, but personal insults have no place in the conversation.

It has nothing to do with opinions.In my experence I have never really seen people talk or type like that on less they are detoxing or in flame war. It was not flame war that was going on with both us but a out lash of his inappropriate reply to first post is much to be frown on his character.And this is some thing I will not take regardless of forum rules and getting me ban.I would have not have been so rude if in thread we where in flame war or debating hard but this was NOT the case and response to first post that is very much inappropriate .

I would have not got all worked up here if all the news outlets the media and WHO said in way that scientist are working on this and doing studies and experiments ( and there debate amog scientist ) but it is not proven yet .

But when news outlets the media and WHO say talking on cell phone = cancer ,eating bread = cancer , living by power lines = caner than 20 years later it proven wrong that is want makes me sick.

What is the mechanism? That's one question that needs to be answered for this to be science rather than sensationalism.

I'm not sure what you mean here.

You don't have the slightest clue how science works, do you?

 

You want long studies? Look around. Every one of the studies you disparage is long, well done, with adequate controls and rigor.

 

News flash:Sometimes things are complicated and subtle, and thus take more than one study to figure out. And we can't know how complicated things are without doing studies first.

No becuse cell phone fad has only been past 15 years tops and if there was more studies and repeated and longer studies it would be fact and no debate in the medical community on if EMF or electricity is bad or not.

Merged post follows:

 

As for electromagnetic waves. Some are ionizing radiation, which means they can damage the chemicals in your body (if in a medical context). Ionizing radiation is generally bad, unless you like damaged proteins in your body. Because the energy of each photon is related to the frequency (or the wavelength if you prefer), EM waves of a longer wavelength are composed of photons with lower energy. Visible light, for example, is an EM wave. Light is not considered harmful, but tell that to an ant under a magnifying glass. Radio and micro waves have an even longer wavelength than visible light, so each photon has less energy. Hence it would seem very unlikely that they would damage you more than light would

That is what I do not understand if radio waves and microwaves are not ionizing radiation than how is it bad ? On less they are using high power .

And if I understand cell phones use low power much less than CB radio.If living by high voltage power line how can it brake down cells or DNA if it is not ionizing .The human body runs on small electricity and the cells turn the food and water into energy. At most it may disrupt the signaling process in the body.

But I don't understand if it is not ionizing how can electricity or EMF brake down cells or DNA ?When people have a heart attack they give people shock

If you don't like science, you can **** off. (*) Go back to your cave, make a campfire, and catch your own food. If you don't see the benefit of science, then frankly this world can do without you.

 

Because of science, you get to live to be 80 or older, you only have to work a lazy 8 hrs per day, you get your food from a fridge in a building around the corner, and your kids have a nearly 100% chance of survival.

 

That beautiful past you seem to be dreaming of was a time when people did not have the time to develop cancer, because they died long before that. Life expectancy was 50-60, but people didn't know any better. Most worked boring jobs in factories - doing the same every day. Or were you talking about the good old days of Newton, when the plague was still around, when 80% of the population were illiterate farmers taking a crap in a hole in the ground and having only 1 type of food on the menu?

 

If you don't like this world because nobody promises you to live to 100 without any diseases, if you want the nanny state to promise you all is safe - then take some LSD and dream on.

 

No, it is true, some products that are being developed are not 100% safe. But if you don't understand the science, then don't get angry at the scientists.

 

But this stupid consumers market with poor information is not the fault of the scientists. If it was up to us, you would get a booklet with all the facts with every product... but tests have shown that all the dumb consumers don't read all the crap anyway. When was the last time you entirely read the tiny paper that comes with medicines? Exactly. So stop complaining, thrown away your cellphone if you don't like it... and be angry at yourself... but not at me

 

(*) Apologies for flaming in the name of science. .

First finish detoxing from meth before you type and second read my post again and tell me where I'm bashing science or scientist

That me type it again for the illiterate. I'm not bashing science or scientist and I say again I'm not bashing science or scientist . I'm bashing the short studies that lead to false reporting or deabtes among scientist do to short studies where is the long and repeated studies that will clear up the false reporting or deabtes .

The subject on the other had here on the EMF and electricity like on power lines or in the wall do harm to the body is debate among scientist do to we need more studies and repeated and longer studies.The WHO seems to jump on these topics on EMF and electricity making it sound like proven fact not saying this is a controversial topic.And non scientist do not know about this at all.

The media and WHO likes to jump on these short studies that scientist are working on and say it is fact and than years later scientist prove if it is true or not and this makes me sick.Some times scientist should not say any thing to they do more studies and repeated and longer studies to get hard facts on the topic.

Merged post follows:

I think your beef is more with science reporting, and specifically medical science reporting. There are many instances where the reporter does not make it clear what the scientific finding mean or even of they are credible. The cell-phone studies, for example, are not controlled experiments. They are data-mining exercises, and prone to errors because of irregularities in the sampling.

What do you mean by not controlled experiments but data-mining

The physics and biology tell us that the photons cannot cause the damage being ascribed to the devices. But most of the stories don't discuss that; sensationalizing the result wins the day.

I thought gamma rays and x-rays are the only thing in EM spectrum than cam brake down cells or DNA.

Most talk about the type of radiation like is it radio wave or x-ray and the strength and how much radiation.

In school we learn that gamma rays and x-rays are a bad type of radiation and going to doctor getting too many x-rays is bad.

Keep in mind smoking does not = cancer, too many x-rays does not = cancer, eating bad food does not = cancer. It just increasess your risk over time. There are some people that can smoke all their life and not get cancer and other people smoke and in their 30's or 40's get cancer.

We learn in school that gamma rays and effects of nuclear explosions and too many x-rays is really bad . But there is little talk on the other parts of the EM spectrum or electricity if it is bad.

A cursory examination of the claims will show that microwave weapons to cause pain is different from microwaves causing cancer. Saying that the photons can't ionize and damage DNA is not the same as saying that you can't cause local heating and inflict pain and cause thermal damage. The individual reading the science stories carries some responsibility for properly interpreting the facts.

The thing is the type of radiation, strength and how much radiation. I think the problem is some think that too much microwaves or spending 3 years non stop in front it = cancer. Getting hit by microwave weapons for 10 minutes will not cause cancer but getting hit by a microwave weapon for 2 years non stop = cancer!!!

A microwave weapon stronger than other microwave weapon = cancer. The understanding of the type of radiation, strength and how much radiation over time may be key to understanding this better.

6 cell phone safety wake-up calls

http://health.lifestyle.yahoo.ca/channel_section_details.asp?text_id=4711&channel_id=1030&relation_id=34757

I mean really science today is not about facts but short studies and want they think is bad or not . There are scientist that say EMF is bad and others saying EMF is only bad if it is ultraviolet ,x-rays ,gamas rays are bad and radio waves long wave and radio wave short waves , microwaves ,visible and infrared cannot go through the skin or brake down cells. Well the army have been doing re-search into using high power microwaves to do harm to the other army to burn their skin and pain has a way not to kill them. But really some scientist say EMF is bad and others say not .Some say he made stuff up.

I'm sick of short studies and claims .Spend the $1,000,000,000,000 have 3,0000 scientist spend 30 to 50 years do your studies than publish it.Nothing makes me more sick than fast studies and scientist debating that makes news for the non scientist .

There was time that science was fact and needed hard science to make the news .

Now you have scientist toady on talk radio talking about UFO's ,ghosts ,shadow people and stuff that artbell or coast coast AM talks about . Really we going down the drain fast.

It looks like we really will not know about EMF and electricity if it is good or bad for other 50 or 100 years.

Perhaps the biggest retraction in progress was antibiotics.

I have it on the list above .Also anesthesia and other pain meds.

I have been reading this week on the medical advancement.First I will like to point out cancer was not problem before becuse most people did not live past 45 150 years ago

Look at the population stats 150 years ago to now we are almost almost to point that some thing has to be down to lower the population or pack up and move to other planet .

People are almost living to 100 now so cancer is big problem now .The invention of automobile ,machines and robots in factories along with the invention of TV ,computer and supermarket has exploded a epidemic of obesity and diabetes. We no longer need to cut down trees and burn the wood for heat and light or cook are food.

And all this cuts down on are work. We no longer need a garden !!! We get in are car and drive to the supermarket and buy are food of week!! This has exploded a epidemic of obesity & diabetes :eek:

And the jobs are becoming less labour now and more office work and IT work .No longer we need turn burn wood for heat or light .

Has there ar more machines and robots in factories and more service sector work more obesity & diabetes .We no longer have walk school or work:eek:'

But major food and water shortage in Africa and the Middle East and some areas in South America and China has made big drain on resources.The US ,UK and Canada cannot help the poor in their country than help those other countries..

With human population out of control there is more need for trees and this is doing away of the rainforest !!! We need trees for wood to build homes and we need trees for paper and this a major problem.

In areas in the Middle East and some areas in South America and very much so Southeast Asia people are living on top of people ? The country is to small and too many people and city like Shanghai ,Beijing ,Hong Kong ,Chongqing , Mumbai so on is so dense it is a big problem.

Now I have been reading about medical advancement and green movment .

Here is some medical advancement in past 40 years.

heart transplant, by Christian Barnard

MRI and fMRI, by Paul Lauterbur and Peter Mansfield (among others?)

CAT scan, by Godfrey Hounsfield and Allan Cormack

ultrasound scan, by Ian Donald

1982, artificial heart, by Robert Jarvik

Pain patches

anti-siezure medication

decongestants insulin drugs

anti-depressants

accine that lowers your risk against cervical cancer

3-D ultrasounds, MRIs, body scans

liver, heart, kidney ,face transplant

There are cures for some cancers, fungi and parasites

antibiotics

penicillin

anesthesia

painkillers

First permanent artificial heart implant

Deep-brain electrical stimulation system

First laser surgery on human cornea

1990’s Human Genome Project

Last fatal case of smallpox

1980 - Raymond Damadian builds first commercial MRI scanner

1981 - First vaccine for Hepatitis B

1987 - Ben Carson, leading a 70-member medical team in Germany, was the first to separate occipital craniopagus twins.

1992 - First vaccine for Hepatitis A available

2003 - Carlo Urbani, of Doctors without Borders alerted the World Health Organization to the threat of the SARS virus, triggering the most effective response to an epidemic in history. Urbani succumbs to the disease himself in less than a month.

2005 - Jean-Michel Dubernard performs the first partial face transplant

2006 - First HPV vaccine approved

2006 - Second rotavirus vaccine approved (first was withdrawn)

2008 - Laurent Lantieri performs the first full face transplant

()() Now on some of them I could not find the date. :eek:

I was just reading today that they use the same math to make pictures of space look better has the same math to make a picture look better.

Saying it just more math .If one take small grainy picture you can make it bigger and clear it just very advance math.

Not sure what math they are talking about.

Just update but LA energy infrastructure is so overstressed they are talking about rolling black outs.

And May Ban Big TVs !!

The trouble is also that we essentially have to "use" the nuke now, in that we need to do a lot of research on how to deliver the nuke, where to detonate, etc., research that would only make sense if we were intending to use a nuke. Also, for a more rapid response time, it would be a good idea to have the nuke in orbit ahead of time, as space launches are dependent on the weather and other factors so it could take a particularly long time to get to launch it safely. Though I suppose we could spend a year doing research and preparing the launch after we detect an asteroid threat that we can't stop by other means.

For the reason above .You have to test and try it out so when real thing comes you know what to do.The point is going up in space and back cost too much money and only countries that want to spend that money is the US , China and Russia . ((( keep mind that China is still trying to catch up to the US and this will take time ))

Going in space and back is a big challenge and is not like getting in your car or getting in plane.It can take 10 to 15 years just to design , engineer and test a new rocket. It is not some thing in 1 or 2 years you can design , engineer and test a new rocket.

Going in space is like going in rafts now we just learning how to get in space and make it safe and bring the cost down.

In movies and scfi shows they make look so easy this not the case.

That say twin does crime like robbery or B&E than how will the police find the right twin that has the same DNA ,fingerprint and looks ?

And if cloning of people where possible this is other problem how would find the person who has the same DNA and fingerprint ?

This so fake no way this is true.

From what the other poster was saying there seems to be a slow down of drugs being made now.The reply was that we got drugs for the easy stuff to treat .Now it is to find drugs for the hard stuff too treat .

I was saying to try herbs , spices ,tress ,plants ,flowers , microorganisms , incests ,shrubs so on.The reply I got was they are looking into this but it takes time and there is not enough resources to try all living matter in 10 years.

The reply I got was all the different species of plants, fungus, bacteria, and insect and all living matter is so astronomical that they do not have the resources to try this in 10 years even 80 years. They are looking into it but it takes very long time do to the lack of resources .

So the reply is yes they are trying every thing they are looking very hard to find cure.

People tell me most all drugs you see now did not exit 200 years ago .Other people say the slow down of drugs is also do to testing .They come out with new drug but have do all kinds of testing before it comes out to make sure people do not get sick.The testing takes a long time.

Others say what is really progressing fast now is cloning .stem cell and genetic engineering and this will transform society like the dark age to now with medical advancement.

I don't know what book ,web site or article to read about how drug companies work , how they look for a cure and what they are working on.

He is making fun of the fact we don't have a plama gun like star wars to fire at it.

Not sure what NASA would do.But nukes will not work.

Intresting .

Not sure just how much a power plant has over lightning bolt or just how low the power of a lightning is.

Since the late 1980s there have been several attempts to investigate the possibility of harvesting energy from lightning. While a single bolt of lightning carries relatively very little energy, this energy is concentrated in a small location and is passed during an extremely short period of time (milliseconds); therefore, extremely high electrical power is involved.[114] It has been proposed that the energy contained in lightning be used to generate hydrogen from water, or to harness the energy from rapid heating of water due to lightning.[115]

 

A technology capable of harvesting lightning energy would need to be able to rapidly capture the high power involved in a lightning bolt. Several schemes have been proposed, but the low energy involved in each lightning bolt render lightning power harvesting from ground based lightning rods as impractical.[116] According to Northeastern University physicists Stephen Reucroft and John Swain, while a lightning bolt carries a few million joules of energy, that is very little relative to the rate at which energy is used in a typical household. Additionally, lightning is sporadic, and therefore energy would have to be collected and stored; it is difficult to convert high-voltage electrical power to the lower-voltage power that can be stored.[115]

 

In the summer of 2007, an alternative energy company called Alternate Energy Holdings (AEH) tested a method for capturing the energy in lightning bolts. The design for the system had been purchased from an Illinois inventor named Steve LeRoy, who had reportedly been able to power a 60-watt light bulb for 20 minutes using the energy captured from a small flash of artificial lightning. The method involved a tower, a means of shunting off a large portion of the incoming energy, and a capacitor to store the rest. According to Donald Gillispie, CEO of AEH, they "couldn't make it work," although "given enough time and money, you could probably scale this thing up... it's not black magic; it's truly math and science, and it could happen."[117]

 

According to Dr. Martin A. Uman, co-director of the Lightning Research Laboratory at the University of Florida and a leading authority on lightning,[118] a single lighting strike, while fast and bright, contains very little energy, and dozens of lighting towers like those used in the system tested by AEH would be needed to operate five 100-watt light bulbs for the course of a year. When interviewed by The New York Times, he stated that the energy in a thunderstorm is comparable to that of an atomic bomb, but trying to harvest the energy of lightning from the ground is "hopeless".[117]

It would be intresting to see what NASA or the UN is going to do. May be DAPA they get alot of money and dark ops have some thing.

Because "We've just received a distress signal from Alpha Centauri!" "Maximum power. Let's hope they can last twenty years..." doesn't make for a fun TV show.

I would not hold your breath .Even if they did make one it would not be that much bigger than your car ,Not nice for scfi TV.

The big problem is propulsion and why we have to use stages .Now some are working on plane that takes of using a jet and when get high to XY the rocket kicks in.

The DC-X and the X-33 had major problems and that is why they scrap it.