Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Em Drive Thrust Confirmed According To Nasa


ContraBardus

Recommended Posts

 

 

...leaving Pantheory to point out that even though . . .

 

 

Is that guy still bashing science?  Seems like it never ends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

...leaving Pantheory to point out that even though . . .

 

 

Is that guy still bashing science?  Seems like it never ends.

 

 

How does one bash science?  Science never proves anything.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

How does one bash science?  Science never proves anything.  

 

 

 

It's been a while but last time he sang a song of "Don't trust mainstream science because they don't know

 

what they are doing so instead you should trust my theory because I say so."  It wasn't a good song.

 

You are right that science never proves anything but the system self corrects over time so in the long run

 

science gets an ever improving picture even if the improvements are slow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

...leaving Pantheory to point out that even though . . .

 

 

Is that guy still bashing science?  Seems like it never ends.

 

 

How does one bash science?  Science never proves anything.  

 

 

It's not supposed to. Science is supposed to explain things, not prove them, and it does a good job of that.

 

If you want proof, that's what Math is for, it's the only discipline you can actually prove anything in.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

...leaving Pantheory to point out that even though . . .

 

 

Is that guy still bashing science?  Seems like it never ends.

 

 

How does one bash science?  Science never proves anything.  

 

 

It's not supposed too. Science is supposed to explain things, not prove them, and it does a good job of that.

 

If you want proof, that's what Math is for, it's the only discipline you can actually prove anything in.

 

 

Actually, I think it's two disciplines that are absolute.  

 

Is this true?   "In mathematics, a proof is a deductive argument for a mathematical statement."  

 

From  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_proof

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has there been any major findings about the EmDrive from the last time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this true?   "In mathematics, a proof is a deductive argument for a mathematical statement."

 

From  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_proof

 

It's true enough for most people, but it isn't exactly correct.

 

Strictly speaking, a mathematical proof is very abstract. What you need to do first is define which system you are using. You do this by writing down the axioms of your system. To do this, you use a formal language which consists of its own alphabet (a list of symbols, with meanings specific to that language). Once your system is established, you can actually prove things. The first step here is to write down the statement that you are trying to prove in the language of your system. Then you show, by following the rules of your system, that this statement directly and necessarily follows from the axioms. As you do this, you explicitly list every step along the way. This listing of steps showing the transformation of your axioms into the statement you are trying to prove via the rules of your system is a real proof.

 

This is almost never actually done, however. It's extremely tedious, and generally unnecessary. What is usually done is that a mathematician shows that it is possible to prove a statement in this way. It turns out that demonstrating that a proof exists is generally much easier than actually producing the proof. But of course, once it has been shown that a proof of a statement 'A' exists, actually generating the proof is not necessary: if the proof of 'A' exists in a particular system then 'A' must be true in that system (Note that it does not follow that 'A' is true in all systems). The process of showing that proofs exist is a much more informal process, and basically consists of making deductive arguments to the effect that 'A' is true under a particular set of axioms and rules.

 

(Aside: one method of proof is mathematical induction. This is not to be confused with inductive reason. Mathematical induction is a type of deduction.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, disillusioned.  So much of this stuff is over my head.   WendyDoh.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

...leaving Pantheory to point out that even though . . .

 

 

Is that guy still bashing science?  Seems like it never ends.

 

 

He only stops when he gets banned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I'd like to see a solar powered rocket. You would say it needs to be near a sun to work at it's best but the idea is that it spend years orbiting fairly close to the sun and building up ever greater speeds, till at the right moment it breaks orbit and heads outwards. Then a conventional propulsion system could take over, as needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to see a solar powered rocket. You would say it needs to be near a sun to work at it's best but the idea is that it spend years orbiting fairly close to the sun and building up ever greater speeds, till at the right moment it breaks orbit and heads outwards. Then a conventional propulsion system could take over, as needed.

 

I've read proposals that suggest using a solar-powered laser to propel spacecraft with light sails out of the solar system. The solar-powered laser would be located closer to the sun than Mercury, and aim the laser at the light sail on the spacecraft. This would greatly increase the distance at which the solar sails would be effective and give a more concentrated source of photons for the light sail. You could get some pretty good speeds out of this kind of arrangement.

 

Of course, if you wanted to slow down on the other end, you'd be shit out of luck, unless you sent another laser to the star you wanted to travel to ahead of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'd like to see a solar powered rocket. You would say it needs to be near a sun to work at it's best but the idea is that it spend years orbiting fairly close to the sun and building up ever greater speeds, till at the right moment it breaks orbit and heads outwards. Then a conventional propulsion system could take over, as needed.

 

I've read proposals that suggest using a solar-powered laser to propel spacecraft with light sails out of the solar system. The solar-powered laser would be located closer to the sun than Mercury, and aim the laser at the light sail on the spacecraft. This would greatly increase the distance at which the solar sails would be effective and give a more concentrated source of photons for the light sail. You could get some pretty good speeds out of this kind of arrangement.

 

Of course, if you wanted to slow down on the other end, you'd be shit out of luck, unless you sent another laser to the star you wanted to travel to ahead of time.

 

 

 

But it would be great for launching space probes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes light sails are technically feasible... we "just" have to build light sails that work well enough. With a huge as-weightless-as-possible sail we could lift something in orbit, unfold the sail, and let the sun take over from there, quite literally sailing through our solar system like the ships of old. At least as long as we stay close enough to the sun. I guess it'll become difficult if we head for Neptune :)

 

Of course with big lasers we'd have a chance to help such a ship quite a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.