View Full Version : The first space travellers are going to be RICH!
Astronomers have found a Huge Diamond (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3492919.stm). 8|
Shadow Dancer
16-02-04, 22:32
Astronomers have decided to call the star "Lucy," after the Beatles song, "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds."
:rolleyes:
Gotterdammerung
16-02-04, 22:34
DeBeers no doubt is already planning a space flight
d00d!
I got dibs on the diamond!
I hope they don't try and cut it here in Amsterdam, the traffic jams are big enough already without people trying to transport diamonds 1500 kms across.
Haha, if they bring back even a fraction of that diamond they will actually lose money, because such a vast amount of diamond(s) will flood the market, basically making them cheaper than dirt... :rolleyes:
And if they bring back enough not to flood the market, they will still lose money because of the vast cost of going... what was it? 17(prolly more...) light years or so and back again....
Other wise cool; reminds me of that company in the states (Life Gem?) that takes your ashes after you've been cremated and compresses them into a diamond for your family :p
Shadow Dancer
16-02-04, 22:39
Originally posted by Gotterdammerung
DeBeers no doubt is already planning a space flight
hahahhah
That was a good one.
:lol:
Psycho Killa
16-02-04, 22:41
Lol russia already has enough diamonds in storage to make them as pricey as a rock you find in your backyard.
Maybe we can find a more useful use to diamonds then just decorations.
We can already make saw blades and such with diamonds integrated to make them stronger surely we can find other applications for them in the future... definately will find a use for them before we can get our hands on this one o_O
Nightbrother
16-02-04, 22:41
Originally posted by Gotterdammerung
DeBeers no doubt is already planning a space flight
And Erich von Däniken speculates in diamond aliens from yonder old diamond star, that visited our planet many millennia ago. :p
Seriously, have any of you ever seen the rings of Saturn through a great telescope? Truly a wondrous experience. Much better than seeing a picture of one taken by Voyager.
Btw, I hope a black hole doesn't see its way fit to suck in that diamond before we get our hands on it. I'd love to see diamonds devaluate so that everyone could own 2 tons, though that would put very many poor people around the world out of jobs, so black hole, do your sucking. :)
QuantumDelta
16-02-04, 22:47
Originally posted by J. Folsom
I hope they don't try and cut it here in Amsterdam, the traffic jams are big enough already without people trying to transport diamonds 1500 kms across. Zero G Produced Goods are often higher quality anyway :)
Just think.
Even if we had the technology to get to it right now, it's still be 100 Years before it got back to earth.
That's at absolute best too...
ZoneVortex
16-02-04, 22:47
That's a huuuuuuuuge bitch
.courtesy of the male jigalo
Psycho Killa
16-02-04, 22:56
Originally posted by QuantumDelta
Zero G Produced Goods are often higher quality anyway :)
Just think.
Even if we had the technology to get to it right now, it's still be 100 Years before it got back to earth.
That's at absolute best too...
unless we can create a rift in the time space fabric !
Worm hole style !
Or einstien could always be wrong... 200 years from now who knows what we can figure out.
I read some where that you can in theory ..make CPU's from diamonds instead of silicon. They could then run the processor at temperatures that would normally liquefy silicon..
just a useless bit of information. Think it was in the mag "Wired"
Heavyporker
16-02-04, 23:17
I wouldn't bother fucking around with a diamond that big in such fucking mundane ways. My gawd, you got no imagination, people.
A nearly indestructble diamond sphere at a size of several hundred thousand miles thick... Deep in space...
I'd cut chunks out of it, bore into those smaller chunks, then mount machinery and wire them up.. voila - perfect interstellar ships capable of taking a lot of punishment from interstellar detritus.
not to mention that it's still useful for fusion fuel, though not as much as straight hydrogen-helium.
I didn't say live on it because at that size, the gravity would pretty much crush anything else not made of something like diamond. Rise of the robot jewellers indeed :p
lol it would be very hard to move it even if we was able to get there. Which it isnt possible to travel at the speed of light (because if you "can" travel at the speed of light, light would be traveling a speed of light faster than you still), so we aint gettin it any time soon. We could always charge people to look at it tho :cool:
What a fitting monument for a destroyed star system.
:(
Originally posted by Marx
What a fitting monument for a destroyed star system.
:( LOL. :( :angel:
Originally posted by Glok
LOL. :( :angel:
Loss of life, exactly
:(
Who knows who or what lived in that system before it ended.
Psycho Killa
16-02-04, 23:45
Imma guess more then likely nothing? :confused:
I think the odds of a solar system being able to support life are insane theres to many factors needed.
Im sure there are some out there but like 1 in a billion, million something like that.
Originally posted by Psycho Killa
Imma guess more then likely nothing? :confused:
I think the odds of a solar system being able to support life are insane theres to many factors needed.
Im sure there are some out there but like 1 in a billion, million something like that.
Single cellular organisms need love too.
:(
I read somewhere that 1 in a million stars has a planet orbiting it capable of supporting life. And there are some billions of stars in the average galaxy.
But that doesn't address (some principle stating that an intelligent civilization only lasts a million years), and since the universe is supposedly 15 billion years old, the chances of 2 intelligent civilizations existing at the same time within communication distance of each other are very low.
Now to find a gigantic ring to fit that in to.
And a gigantic girl to marry with the ring.
....gigantic space girls with diamond rings :D ....
Originally posted by Glok
I read somewhere that 1 in a million stars has a planet orbiting it capable of supporting life. And there are some billions of stars in the average galaxy.
But that doesn't address (some principle stating that an intelligent civilization only lasts a million years), and since the universe is supposedly 15 billion years old, the chances of 2 intelligent civilizations existing at the same time within communication distance of each other are very low.
Don't worry, in 59 years a vulcan scout ship will detect the warpspace signature from Zefram Cochrane's experimental warp drive and take us in.
Don't worry, in 59 years a vulcan scout ship will detect the warpspace signature from Zefram Cochrane's experimental warp drive and take us in.
:lol:
oh shit thats mine, i accidently dropped it last weekend while i was staying at a friends house, if someone wants to bring it back to me ill give em a good tip
Q`alooaith
17-02-04, 01:25
Originally posted by QuantumDelta
100 Years before it got back to earth.
That's at absolute best too...
Only if you obey the speed limit..
Anyway life is more common that you'd think, it's life finding other form's of life that they understand and see as intligent life..
Did you know that we currently have the technology to make diamonds... So wandering all that way for nothing..
BTW, diamonds are used in hardness testing equipment (to test how hard a material is, a set ammount of pressure is applyed though a diamond tip and the size of the dent measured, and from that you can work out the hardness of a material)
And they have several other properites that make them usefull in a large range of application's, though use in these role's is highly limited because of the cost/quality issuses, as you need large shapped diamonds in most of the applications, often thin sheet like form's are needed more often than not..
u know how all those sinister doomsday ray's in scifi always seem to need a diamond to work.....
that diamond would make a supa dupa dupa supa ultra doomsday ray ;]
and its the USA's we claim it manifest destiny!
Heavyporker
17-02-04, 09:45
sheesh, shujin.
only point of using diamonds in energy weapons is cos of it's near-perfect transparency and high temperature threshold. it does nothing to enhance the strength of the energy passing through it.
a sun-sized diamond gonna do shit for some diddling twenty-foot big deathray cannon.
Original monk
17-02-04, 10:12
thats the one ... the diamond that i gonna put in my weddingring :)
•Super|\|ova•
17-02-04, 10:23
Not to mention that it actually is a requirement to be a rich to get to travel to space in the first place ;)
Original monk
17-02-04, 10:30
Originally posted by •Super|\|ova•
Not to mention that it actually is a requirement to be a rich to get to travel to space in the first place ;)
nah, you can make youre own spacecraft out of old laundrymachines and things like empty sodacans and euh youre old snes and stuff, atleast as viable i say
common now lets go get that diamond !!!
Damn... thats a big diamond. Wonder if we could use it as some sorta... giant reflection device for something
Rest assured if it has military purpose, bling is gonna become awfully cheap. :rolleyes:
Original monk
17-02-04, 10:59
Originally posted by Leebzie
Damn... thats a big diamond. Wonder if we could use it as some sorta... giant reflection device for something
Rest assured if it has military purpose, bling is gonna become awfully cheap. :rolleyes:
well we can make a giant laser out of it to start shooting other planets out of the sky and with some luck we find even more and bigger diamonds in those planets LOL
Nash_Brigham
17-02-04, 12:13
Teh gravity on that hunk of rock must be immense. White Dwarves are suppose to have a gravity so heavy that anything would be crushed, whihc explains why the core is a solid diamond now. LOL. Getting within 200km of that thing would probably be like getting near the so called black hole.
Mighty Max
17-02-04, 13:06
would probably be like getting near the so called black hole.
You wouldn't even know if you get too near to a black hole.
1. The weight difference between feet and head is smaller the bigger that hole is -> you wont get streched
2. Since The light is still falling in, you wouldnt see any difference in your view.
3. The nearer you get to the event horizon, the slower moves the time. You'd never reach it to see your head from the back (due to the circular light rays)
10 billion trillion trillion carats
Owned.
steweygrrr
17-02-04, 13:59
Originally posted by Glok
I read somewhere that 1 in a million stars has a planet orbiting it capable of supporting life. And there are some billions of stars in the average galaxy.
But that doesn't address (some principle stating that an intelligent civilization only lasts a million years), and since the universe is supposedly 15 billion years old, the chances of 2 intelligent civilizations existing at the same time within communication distance of each other are very low.
Thats life as WE know it. Carbon and Silicon based life. We need water to survive and we are assuming that just because we do, everything else would too. Thats because earth is a watery world and our bodies have adapted to make use of it.
What if something didnt need water, carbon, silicon, oxygen nitrogen etc to survive? Then we expand the realms of 'habitable planets supporting life' by a great deal.
Forget My Name
17-02-04, 17:33
Originally posted by Marx
Don't worry, in 59 years a vulcan scout ship will detect the warpspace signature from Zefram Cochrane's experimental warp drive and take us in.
AHHAHAHAHA
Originally posted by Psycho Killa
Imma guess more then likely nothing? :confused:
I think the odds of a solar system being able to support life are insane theres to many factors needed.
Im sure there are some out there but like 1 in a billion, million something like that.
Come on, its the usual traps us humans have of feeling we are so special. I'd say those might be the chances of finding 'sentient' life, but we don't know enough about the universe to claim Earth is a 1 in a billion shot. Thats just pompous.
Originally posted by Glok
I read somewhere that 1 in a million stars has a planet orbiting it capable of supporting life. And there are some billions of stars in the average galaxy.
But that doesn't address (some principle stating that an intelligent civilization only lasts a million years), and since the universe is supposedly 15 billion years old, the chances of 2 intelligent civilizations existing at the same time within communication distance of each other are very low.
wrt para 1 - Recent evidence actually suggests habitable planets might actually be the norm, not the exception.
wrt para 2 - That was wild speculation when it first cropped up and remains so.
wrt Diamonds : We can now make them cheaper than mine them. The market is 100% artificial - production is limited and supply is monodirectional (this would be illegal if it hadn't been in place so long). What a con!!! Only chumps would buy a "natural diamond":lol: these days. Oh yeah and btw - the companies you support by buying that overpriced wedding bling have working practices that make Nike look like saints. Many used slaves until only a few decades ago.
Nash_Brigham
17-02-04, 20:40
Originally posted by Mighty Max
You wouldn't even know if you get too near to a black hole.
1. The weight difference between feet and head is smaller the bigger that hole is -> you wont get streched
2. Since The light is still falling in, you wouldnt see any difference in your view.
3. The nearer you get to the event horizon, the slower moves the time. You'd never reach it to see your head from the back (due to the circular light rays)
1) actually, black holes aren't that big to begin with, but their gravity is emmense. A black hole could ctually be the size of a basketball, but you would visibly see light bend around it, making it look WAAAYYY bigger.
2) Since light is falling into the black hole, you most definitely would see a difference in your view.
3) Stargate SG1 theories, though sound, are unproven as of yet. Very nice theory in a sci fi environment, but until science actually proves the fact, we don't know what effect a black hole would have on anyone near it.
Originally posted by Nash_Brigham
1) actually, black holes aren't that big to begin with, but their gravity is emmense. A black hole could ctually be the size of a basketball, but you would visibly see light bend around it, making it look WAAAYYY bigger.
2) Since light is falling into the black hole, you most definitely would see a difference in your view.
3) Stargate SG1 theories, though sound, are unproven as of yet. Very nice theory in a sci fi environment, but until science actually proves the fact, we don't know what effect a black hole would have on anyone near it.
1) Correct thought IIRC the minimum sustainable size is a lot bigger than that unless it's spinning fecking fast. (It's been a while so don't flame if that's upside down or smt ;)).
2) Indeed, black holes can be and are seen by inference. ie there effect on other objects near or behind them. The black hole itself is invisible. It is theorised that larger examples would have a visible accretion ring beyond the event horizon though this is unproven AFAIK.
3) :lol: Well put.
Mighty Max
17-02-04, 22:16
1) actually, black holes aren't that big to begin with, but their gravity is emmense. A black hole could ctually be the size of a basketball, but you would visibly see light bend around it, making it look WAAAYYY bigger.
2) Since light is falling into the black hole, you most definitely would see a difference in your view.
3) Stargate SG1 theories, though sound, are unproven as of yet. Very nice theory in a sci fi environment, but until science actually proves the fact, we don't know what effect a black hole would have on anyone near it.
Yeah, you keep hering those things, but to be axact most of them are not thinked through and wrong.
for point 1) Black Holes might by very small (there is a minimum size tho) but the event horizon (that barrier you cant pass in an earth viewable speed ; Time nearly stopped there for an outstanding viewer) has a minimum size due to the relative mass of a photon and its speed. Even the attracktion it creates to you as an object is really huge, the change in the mass field in just 2 meters isnt that big.
http://home.cwru.edu/~sjr16/media/stars_blackhole_anatomy.jpg
for point 2) Just think about it light is falling into you from all directions. Even directly seen from the star. That is due to the influence of the mass attracktion to the photons. In a normal situation Light is falling into you in the same way ...
(It will create a lense effect tho, but your eyes will most likely. not see it) ...)
http://casa.colorado.edu/~ajsh/singularity.html#photon
for point 3) That hose nothing to do with stargate. The event horizon of a black hole is the point of no return for photons. In this small area part of the photons emmited by an object are forced into a circular route around the black hole, that will lead to the situation that thst photon will reach its object again after one circle...
Refer http://www.rdrop.com/users/green/school/horizon.htm
Behind that event horizon nothing (but some v-quantum created energy transmissions (like gamma bursts)) will escape the black hole. Even not light. Therefor no information might escape the black hole. If you view on time as the flow of information, time has stopped totally.
As said before, there is a way that a black hole emmits something. That is caused by the same effect that holds the light in the hole. In the near of the event horizon, virtual quantum particles are created and destroyed like everywhere in universe. Those particles are normally destroyed within femto seconds again. (Prooven by synchrotron tests) If one part of those quantum particles is just passing the event horizon, it cant melt with the correlating one anymore. This now free particle is free to emmit ...
See http://www.rdrop.com/users/green/school/radiatin.htm
:edit: forgive the many writing failures ... not english
:edit2: Put in some links
1) stargate sg-1 = pwn all that can be pwned, even blackholes.
ex: a black hole goes up to stargate sg-1 and says "joo suxors" and at that same time stargate sg-1 turns around and says "*SMACK*"
as you see in my example, the hole of black is simply pwned beyond recognition.
2) only 4% of the universe is made of what we know, the other 23% is dark matter, stuff we dont even know wtf it is, and the rest is 'dark energy' more stuff we dunno wtf it is... and some of it isnt even considered dark matter or stuff its just stuff thats like wtf?! ;o
so we dont know what other types of life exist for all we know we are being studied by some dark matter type life stuff ands all invisible and like ;O and stuff
Originally posted by Psycho Killa
Lol russia already has enough diamonds in storage to make them as pricey as a rock you find in your backyard.
Maybe we can find a more useful use to diamonds then just decorations.
We can already make saw blades and such with diamonds integrated to make them stronger surely we can find other applications for them in the future... definately will find a use for them before we can get our hands on this one o_O
Diamond toothpicks, diamond window scrapers, diamond chip forks, the list goes on :)
Steve
Originally posted by Shujin
2) only 4% of the universe is made of what we know, the other 23% is dark matter, stuff we dont even know wtf it is, and the rest is 'dark energy' more stuff we dunno wtf it is... and some of it isnt even considered dark matter or stuff its just stuff thats like wtf?! ;o
Shujin's grammar vs The Universe
I'm not placing bets on that one.
Originally posted by jernau
Shujin's grammar vs The Universe
I'm not placing bets on that one. yea stuff and stuff and more stuff > uni, maybe even Biverse maybe even Triverse or Quadverse or Infiverse
Q`alooaith
18-02-04, 04:52
3) Black hole's have massive gravity, this is why they pull light toward's them.. anyway, most pople know that as you move faster time start's tpo go all funky, a watch placed in a vehical going realy realy fast set to the same time as one on earth will end up being behind the one on earth.. Ok, now gravity has a simmlar effect on time, so a watch on the moon compaired with one on earth would run slightly fast, though the scale of diffrence would be suck you'd only see if after a very very long time as a very small diffrence..
Nash_Brigham
18-02-04, 07:05
Everything in Stargate SG1, where your time theory principle is just that, theory. It is not a proven fact, and even though someone was able to reproduce an effect a few times in a tested environment still does not turn a theory into fact. Furthermore, light is what gives us a sense of time, yes, but time does not slow down when you get closer to a black hole, it just appears to do so to outside viewers, due to light not coming back as fast as it would outside the influence of a black hole. Pretty sure the poor schmuck int he black hole is being ripped apart normally.
Mighty Max
18-02-04, 07:18
Yeah i now relativism is only a theory :rolleyes:
You know that you get your electric power due to the same theory? The mass and time relation is just another form of the known E=mc^2 :=>
m = m¡¯/(1- V2/c2)1/2
t = t¡¯/(1- V2/c2)1/2
You should really get more informations about those thinks before posting...
Nash_Brigham
18-02-04, 07:21
I do, and yes, they still call Einstein's thoery because it is jsut that, it is a theory. No one has been able to prove for a fact that if you go at the speed of light, all time will stop. Have you travelled the speed of light before? I know I sure haven't. So, it exists as a theory, and I will tell you know, mr. wizard, there are theories out there now that are being BROKEN everyday because of natural effects in life, and so forth. Hell, I remember when atoms were suppose to be indestructable, but we got atom splitters. You know, the things that give us atomic explosions. Don't tell me that Einstein's Theory is 100%, because it's not. There are many instances of it not working with many facets of life.
Mighty Max
18-02-04, 07:51
lol. They have provven it upto 99.99999% light of speed.
Mesones flying at that speed have a longer lifespan then slow mesones would have. You never cant proove Theories. Even Newton's Laws are still not prooven, but do you expect them to be false anymore?
There are many instances of it not working with many facets of life.
yeah, its not working when structure get's to small, but there are other theories which go with that. Dude it aint no 1950 anymore, ppl have tested many things on that theory, and prooved it right. But hey, why cant you tell that i didnt move in lightspeed? Yeah because Einstein says so. If you think he was wrong, i would be able to prove it
Nash_Brigham
18-02-04, 07:55
Originally posted by Mighty Max
lol. They have provven it upto 99.99999% light of speed.
Mesones flying at that speed have a longer lifespan then slow mesones would have. You never cant proove Theories. Even Newton's Laws are still not prooven, but do you expect them to be false anymore?
yeah, its not working when structure get's to small, but there are other theories which go with that. Dude it aint no 1950 anymore, ppl have tested many things on that theory, and prooved it right. But hey, why cant you tell that i didnt move in lightspeed? Yeah because Einstein says so. If you think he was wrong, i would be able to prove it It's not 99% it's not even 95% sound. Do please read your shit.
Originally posted by Nash_Brigham
It's not 99% it's not even 95% sound. Do please read your shit.
Not meaning to be silly but do you even know the basics of relativity?
You are arguing the validity of a derivation from one part of it for a start and not giving much of an argument at that.
Forget My Name
18-02-04, 09:11
Originally posted by jernau
Not meaning to be silly but do you even know the basics of relativity?
You are arguing the validity of a derivation from one part of it for a start and not giving much of an argument at that.
You want Theory? You want relativity/ I give you...
TIME CUBE (http://www.timecube.com/)
Time Cube disproves that giant diamonds exist.
Giant Diamonds are against Santa God.
The four corners of the giant diamond rotate with Santa God
Bill Pullman is an educated idiot from MIT.
ZoneVortex
18-02-04, 09:17
actually...
how can you say Newton's Laws aren't proven yet...when in science something is called a "Law" once it has been proven...otherwise it's still only a theory, and they aren't "Newton's Theories" now are they ;)
but ok i see what you mean
i think it call comes back to infinity
if i pick up my television remote control and release the muscles in my hand, you'd expext the remote to fall to the ground at 9.8m/s acceleration, yeah? (yeah this is on Earth you smarty pants')
well...can i prove that? i can sit here and do that experiment 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times, but who knows! maybe the next time i do it, it'll go upwards instead! you can NEVER be sure! or maybe it goes downwards towards gravity like always...now i have to think "maybe THIS time it'll fly up!"
I dunno, all too confusing for me to think about right now so i'm goin to bed heheh
edit: YES! ALL WORSHIP THE TIME CUBE! IT IS THE ONLY WAY! YOU CUBELESS UNEDUCATED ASSESS WILL DIE EVIL!:angel:
Originally posted by Harbodus
Come on, its the usual traps us humans have of feeling we are so special. I'd say those might be the chances of finding 'sentient' life, but we don't know enough about the universe to claim Earth is a 1 in a billion shot. Thats just pompous.
Why do we keep looking, scared we're alone ?
1 in a billion almost sounds like a considerable underestimate, but when you think how incredibly absolutely massive the universe is, its possible.
QuantumDelta
18-02-04, 12:19
Wasn't it mathematically proven that it was extremely likely that life existed else where?
Original monk
18-02-04, 12:40
Originally posted by QuantumDelta
Wasn't it mathematically proven that it was extremely likely that life existed else where?
I dont know if it is mathematically proven but if you have some common sence and you TRY to imagine how big this euh, lets call it universe is ... then it would be egoistical to think that we are alone, certainly if ya consider (like posted above) that there maybe is a chance that there are forms of life that dont need water and oxygene and carbon and stuff like that :)
-> even on this planet there are lifeforms wich arent in need of those ...
we see ourselves as developed and sofisticated while actually we are yust the modern cavemen ... i also believe that like 5000 years ago the people had more understanding of the cosmos and the universe/planets/solarsystems then we have now with all our scope's, supercomputers and satelites togheter ... we yust like to believe the opposite ... after all we are the modern humans not ?
we lost a great deal of knowledge with the dissapearing of previous great civilizations... like: egyptians, aztecs and certain great asian and middle eastern civilizations .. to give some examples ..
i have my own toughts about this subject cause until now science didnt gave me any confirmed decent answers ... they all say the opposite anyway and the scientific toughts about our universe (ya see i allready call it our universe ... while its probably not our universe alone ..) we have now will be old or even completely wrong news in about 100 years from now ...
they still dont know it themselves hehe, and i think we (humanity) wont know it soon cause we are yust to dumb or dont have the necessary brain capacity to understand/comprehend these mathers ... even if youre name is einstein, hawkin or whatever ... where still humans .. cavemen in suits ...
Retettfully the stars core is made from carbon and prolly doesn't look nice. DeBeers won't be there for a long time sine the brown dwarf is a long way away. You'll have to wait a long time afore it cools down to get your stickly fingers on this gem.
Q`alooaith
18-02-04, 15:24
Originally posted by Original monk
we're still humans .. cavemen in suits ...
(I corrected for grammer/spelling)
It's the age's ok mankind..
People wear necklaces made of glass, lot's of pretty colours, don't know much about history..
People harness the electron, and stop wearing glass necklaces, start using CD's and computer's.. Much is known of recent history..
People wear necklaces made of CD shards, lot's of pretty colours......
"I know not what weapon's a thrid world war would be waged with, but the fouth will be made with rock's and sticks"
Originally posted by Q`alooaith
"I know not what weapon's a thrid world war would be waged with, but the fouth will be made with rock's and sticks"
...its "sticks and stones" :p
I want a pet black hole called steve :(
~Tratos
Q`alooaith
18-02-04, 15:28
Originally posted by Tratos
...its "sticks and stones" :p
I want a pet black hole called steve :(
~Tratos
I'm not quoting him, I'm quoting somone else mis-quoting him..
And....?
Your point is....?
~Tratos
Q`alooaith
18-02-04, 15:46
Originally posted by Tratos
And....?
Your point is....?
~Tratos
Point is your correction is incorrect, since the person I quoted said what I put there though he was mis-quoting the person your thinking of...
You dont get sarcasm do you?
Fine you win, lets not continue this here as we seem to be high jacking the tread, jeeze :rolleyes:
~Tratos
Q`alooaith
18-02-04, 15:52
I thought the idea was to hijack the thread....
ahh well
*wander off*
err, on topic... errr errr errr...
it's too far away and it'd not be viable to go their just for a hard rock... er er errrr... yea, that's it... you'd not get rich..
that's on topic yea... hmm, Yea...
Original monk
18-02-04, 16:02
Originally posted by Q`alooaith
(I corrected for grammer/spelling)
It's the age's ok mankind..
People wear necklaces made of glass, lot's of pretty colours, don't know much about history..
People harness the electron, and stop wearing glass necklaces, start using CD's and computer's.. Much is known of recent history..
People wear necklaces made of CD shards, lot's of pretty colours......
"I know not what weapon's a thrid world war would be waged with, but the fouth will be made with rock's and sticks"
very nice yeah
especially the last quote ya made :) about the 4th WW :)
and i cant add anything more with that then, you are right
enjoy playing Q`alooiath, and after DMing you so much for that kami i know how to spell youre name correct :cool:
Q`alooaith
18-02-04, 16:15
Original monk, + anyone else..
I no longer have the kami chip... thankyou..
Also, there are two diffrent Q'alooaith, there's..
Q'alooaith
and
Q`alooaith
and untill only a little while ago both where char's..... one PPU, one APU... oop's, off topic again..
I'll stop now, I'm sorry for the delay..
Original monk
18-02-04, 16:39
Originally posted by Q`alooaith
Original monk, + anyone else..
I no longer have the kami chip... thankyou..
it was you for sure :) it was the one with the: `
and i know you dont have it anymore, its in my apu's head to level up hehe :)
and to go back ontopic: if you go stand on top of the planet wich is a diamond a ya put the 2 outher ends of a wire in the ground and ya hang it around youre neck then ya can say you have the biggest diamond neclace in the universe :P lol, im sorry
Originally posted by QuantumDelta
Wasn't it mathematically proven that it was extremely likely that life existed else where?
How could that be done?
There's too much cross over between Science-Fiction and Science in the the general public these days and this thread is proof of that at least.
Also as zii said - the "diamond" is really nothing of the kind. It's a plasma largely comprised of carbon nuclei that is so compressed it has formed a naturally crystalline structure.
Originally posted by jernau
There's too much cross over between Science-Fiction and Science in the the general public these days and this thread is proof of that at least.
Also as zii said - the "diamond" is really nothing of the kind. It's a plasma largely comprised of carbon nuclei that is so compressed it has formed a naturally crystalline structure. You first call out the people spouting pseudo-science, and then go on to spout it yourself?
Originally posted by Glok
You first call out the people spouting pseudo-science, and then go on to spout it yourself?
Explain yourself.
Q`alooaith
18-02-04, 21:25
Originally posted by jernau
Explain yourself.
What do you think a diamond is?
Is what I think he's trying to say..
Originally posted by Q`alooaith
What do you think a diamond is?
A specific form of crystalline carbon made up of covalent tetrahedrally bound atoms.
What do you think it is?
Q`alooaith
18-02-04, 21:32
Heh...
Unless you go there you'll not know for sure that it's not a diamond...
Originally posted by Q`alooaith
Carbon that's bonded in a spefic way, normaly under high pressure and intense heat.
Hey I just now it's the hardest substance known to from naturaly... And that it's got a wide number of uses other than decorative..
The critical point wrt the thread topic is "atoms". Atoms have a nucleus and orbitting electrons. In the extreme temperature and pressure of a star (orders of magnitude greater than that inside a planets crust) the atoms are ionised (stripped of their electrons) to form a plasma.
The forms and methods of crystalising an atomic substance are simply not possible in this context.
/edit - stop editing :p. My point is that just because it's made of carbon nucleii and is described as "crystalline" doesn't make it a diamond.
Q`alooaith
18-02-04, 21:39
Tell you what, prove it's not a diamond...
I won't prove it is, since I can't, and don't realy care..
BTW, you don't know how it's bonded, or at what temprature it is currently at, hell it could be doing all funky kind's of thing's because it's so diffrent..
Some thing's just don't scale up, I could give a good recent example, but that might upset some people.
Originally posted by Q`alooaith
Tell you what, prove it's not a diamond...
I won't prove it is, since I can't, and don't realy care..
Well we know roughly the temperature and pressure there and we know the energy required to ionise carbon so we know there are no carbon atoms ergo there are no "diamonds" in the earthly sense. It's nice dramatic license to call it a diamond but it's not very accurate.
/edit - it's not different. It's what has been predicted for some time but now we can prove it. That in itself shows that our knowledge and theories of the processes are pretty accurate.
QuantumDelta
18-02-04, 21:44
I'll clarify a bit but I can't remember the name of the theory, nor can I remember the actual math (it has been a while...) - if you remember I did post fermi's paradox a while ago so it should be obvious stuff like this does interest me :p
Anyway, the theory took into account how many stars there are in our galaxy and how many earth like stars there are in our galaxy and how many earth like objects orbiting these stars there are likely to be in our galaxy etc etc, it was pretty complex but I wasn't ever paying much attention - anyways, because of the statistics it was deemed extremely likely that /somewhere/ life exists - and, that /somewhere/ is most probably more than just one or two planets in other systems.
The theory speaks nothing of searching for intelligent life - only life itself :p
Q`alooaith
18-02-04, 21:47
Though would it not be somthing else then, a diamond not yet cooled enough to form?
Just like lava is melted rock's, so this whatever is a melted diamond...
:rolleyes:
bah, wanna ask me somthing about diving or wielding, maybe somthing about underwater wielding?
Originally posted by QuantumDelta
The theory speaks nothing of searching for intelligent life - only life itself :p
Who say's there's any intelligent life on earth? [I said nothing more, this was just a blank space... ]
Originally posted by QuantumDelta
I'll clarify a bit but I can't remember the name of the theory, nor can I remember the actual math (it has been a while...) - if you remember I did post fermi's paradox a while ago so it should be obvious stuff like this does interest me :p
Anyway, the theory took into account how many stars there are in our galaxy and how many earth like stars there are in our galaxy and how many earth like objects orbiting these stars there are likely to be in our galaxy etc etc, it was pretty complex but I wasn't ever paying much attention - anyways, because of the statistics it was deemed extremely likely that /somewhere/ life exists - and, that /somewhere/ is most probably more than just one or two planets in other systems.
The theory speaks nothing of searching for intelligent life - only life itself :p
This one is a regular topic for SETI advocates/oponents and all similar groups. The fact is that many of the variables are guess-work though. Until recently (as in <2 or 3 years) we assumed that finding planets the right size in the right orbits was very unlikely. We now believe that's not the case as we have found 2 already in our immediate neighbourhood. As more data becomes available we may eventually get an accurate view but for now it's all rather biased by who's doing the math.
Originally posted by Q`alooaith
Though would it not be somthing else then, a diamond not yet cooled enough to form?
Just like lava is melted rock's, so this whatever is a melted diamond...
:rolleyes:
Melting (or subliming in this case IIRC) it stops it being a diamond as it breaks down the structure :p.
If it were to cool in the traditional sense it would more likely end up like coke slag I suspect but that's an educated guess. While the star continues to burn however the nuclei will continue to transmute into other forms. I didn't do many astro courses and I'm not going to dig out the notes for those I did so someone (max?) may know better on that part as to what is next in the sequence.
Mighty Max
19-02-04, 17:21
Heyo, i gonna put up a last note onto this, then ill be quiet. I dont want to show off, just provide valid info.
-Newton's Laws:
Its not only the mass attracktion. Newton#s laws are 3 rules. The two that still remain under critism are:
* A mass cant accelerate without an external force.
* For every Force (Actio) there will be an correlating Force (Reactio)
That sounds valid and got prooven a millions of times. BUT it might be invalid in very special situations. See the follow example:
You have seen a lightmil? It rotates due to the photon pressure. The pressure of a photon is result of its mass while it moves. (It transports energy, and since energy does mean it has mass, it can hit other masses and create forces.)
But where is the reactio in this situation? It has to be at the light source, since this is creating this actio. Unfortunally while the photon is not yet created as a moving energy(mass) it has only its Ruhemasse (german, dont know english pendant) the ruhemasse is 0 for quantums like photons. so accelerating this will result in no reactio. - Sice Newtons laws depends on forces only applies to masses
So we have it. An actio (at the lightmil) without reactio.(at the source)
Yeah that would proove Newton wrong. But he's still right you just have to choose the right parameters for this tests. That applies to all Theories tho. The is nothing called a "World formula" which would show all effects possible.
- The basics of the theory to relativism (not only by Einstein, but by many clever ppl) do have the same errors. The theory works prfect in macro scale. (which we do have at a black hole) But at the micro scale it doesnt. There we have another effect that is moving in. Quantum mechanism.
I am no expert in that tho, but there are others that have provven a good part in it. and as long as someone can explain an effect of an experiment before the experiment is done. And aftertrhat the results are the same, i'd expect the theory behind that valid. UNTIL there is an experiment that shows it isn't.
- The lightspeed. There are experiments that go really near to the lightspeed. Yes, that has nothing to do with complete mechanics flying that far, but single electrons, mesons, ions, even heavy ions can be accelerated to these relative speeds with Synchrotons. These Speeds are not measured in km/h or mph anymore but in MEV (mega electron volt) since the mass of an accelerated particle increases and therefor its energy expressed in relative to electron in normal state. The SRS in Daresbury i.e. Accelerates to 2 GeV. That is
m = m0/(1- V^2/c^2)^1/2
with an electron normally having a mass of 1eV =>
2000000000eV = 1eV/ (1-V^2/c^2)^1/2
<=> [with V<>c]
1/2000000000 = (1-V^2/c^2)^1/2
<=
1/2000000000^2 = 1-V^2/C^2
<=>
1-(1/2000000000) = V^2/C^2
<=>
1-(1/2000000000) * C^2 = V^2
<=>
0,9999999995 * C^2 = V^2
=>
V = 0,99999999974999999996874999999219 * C
So basically the electron is moving at 99,999999974999999996874999999219 % of lightspeed
- I am interested in those things so i read much about it. I can only say that if you are interested by yourself, Go read some books. A good point to start is "Universe in a Nutshell" since it is interesting written and leads to detailled information due to it named sources in it.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.