Re: Nuclear technology and space
- From: kT <cosmic@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 01:33:27 -0500
Wayne Throop wrote:
: kT <cosmic@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
: Not at all, that would be fantastic.
So what? Your claim that it must be "all right" didn't
mention how plausible it was, merely that given that one was
in favor of nuclear power, one muswt be in favor of nuclear genocide.
That's actually a remarkably unreasonable conclusion.
Almost as unreasonable as the initial claim that since radioactivity is natural, it's perfectly all right to concentrate it to lethal purity.
And so I remark upon it.
As did I.
: Technology enables evil.
Right. And you equated somebody else's advocacy of technology
with its evil use. If you don't do the same for your own advocacy
of technology, then you're being hypocritical.
I'm more of a condensed matter physics kind of guy, not a solar concentration kind of guy. I suppose I could electrocute you with my solar panels if I was really really evil, but I'm not. Again, it's a matter of energy scale, but we all know where that argument leads us. You know about energy and stuff, right? Volts and amps and stuff? Mass and velocity and stuff? Here is a table :
http://www.lifeform.org/index.htm#index
: No, the above is by your crackpot logic. Anybody will be able to nuke
: a city if nuclear power was ramped up to our global energy
: necessities.
No, not particularly, not necessarily. You don't even know what form
of nuclear power is being advocated, and whether it's plausible that
weapons-grade materials would be in the fuel cycle anywhere.
No, but I know the order of energy of its reactions. That's enough.
: We discuss these kinds of things all the time in my group - the Sea
: Dragon ballistic missile, the Shuttle SRB bunker buster. Simple
: stuff.
Well isn't that special. Good for you.
Yes, the order of kinetic energy of orbital space flight, measured by it's minimum unit, a hydrogen atom, molecule, hydroxyl and related radicals, ozone, water molecule, etc. It may burn you, but it isn't going to drive a long columnar defect through your biological tissues. Anybody can multiply that to lethality, but that doesn't make it all right in the ambient. Natural radioactivity can kill you just as easy as artificially concentrated radioactivity. One wrong little slice of DNA.
If I thought for an instant you guys were sophisticated enough to discuss it in a rational manner, I might try it with you, but my previous experience demonstrates that you are not. I don't have that problem with my collaborators, because they are rational and reasonable.
So go ahead, explode yourself. I prefer translational invariance, but all you idiots can say is eeek, technobabble. We, on the other hand, are thoroughly enjoying ourselves, making remarkable new discoveries every day, making up whole new words and concepts all the time, pushing the boundaries of knowledge at every turn, and not freaking out at all.
Not freaking out in the face of the unknown, because as far as I can tell, very little of everything is known yet, and there are clear indications that everything will never be known. I suggest when you start experimenting at black hole densities, you be very very careful.
--
Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator :
http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Nuclear technology and space
- From: Wayne Throop
- Re: Nuclear technology and space
- References:
- Nuclear technology and space
- From: angus633
- Re: Nuclear technology and space
- From: Damon Hill
- Re: Nuclear technology and space
- From: kT
- Re: Nuclear technology and space
- From: Wayne Throop
- Re: Nuclear technology and space
- From: kT
- Re: Nuclear technology and space
- From: Wayne Throop
- Nuclear technology and space
- Prev by Date: Re: Nuclear technology and space
- Next by Date: Re: Nuclear technology and space
- Previous by thread: Re: Nuclear technology and space
- Next by thread: Re: Nuclear technology and space
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|