02-09-2011, 12:29 AM
Hi,
No. That leaves a very small number of unexplained sightings. Technically, they are UFOs in the sense I used above. But I doubt that they are actually any different from the ones that have been explained.
What technology? Low observable materials? High bandpass quiet engines? Unmanned aerial vehicles? Those all really exist. They've been featured in the technical and common news for years.
Anti-gravity technology? FTL? Death rays? How would you know they exist? Where are you getting this information. Note, I'm not saying they don't exist (although I highly doubt their existence), I'm just asking you how you *know* they exist.
Possibly, but probably not. If I remember the theory, it is the churning of the crust that causes pockets of similar materials to clump together and form worthwhile mineral deposits. Earth is the only rocky planet that exhibits that behavior. And the Jovian planets would be a bit hard to set up even robotic mines on.
All mechanical systems fail. All computer programs have errors. For flying cars to be safe, they have to have some system that will allow them to land under many types of failure. That's either wings (glide) or rotors (auto-rotate).
Well, there re a few things here. "If aliens ..." Since the existence of those aliens is yet to be shown, postulating their capabilities is a bit premature.
Now, you seem to be confusing 'speed' and 'acceleration'. An aircraft carrier catapult throws you out there so that you hit about 200 kt in a tad less than two seconds. That's somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 to 6 g acceleration.
It doesn't take a big acceleration to get very high velocities. Consider 9 g (about the upper limit for a trained pilot with the appropriate gear. That will put you at about Mach 2.5 in about 10 seconds.
Earth to moon, going ballistic the way we did for the moon landings, took about three days. If we had engines capable of giving us a constant 1 g acceleration, it would take about a day and a half. At 9 g it would take about 1/2 day. The problem isn't high accelerations, the problem is getting any acceleration at all for a long period. And NASA is working on it, with ion engines, solar sails, and more exotic concepts (solar wind ramjets for one straight out of the SF world).
--Pete
(02-08-2011, 09:03 PM)MEAT Wrote: I believe almost all reported UFO's are either civilian planes, satellites, or elaborate hoaxes. That leaves a very small amount of authentic UFO sightings.
No. That leaves a very small number of unexplained sightings. Technically, they are UFOs in the sense I used above. But I doubt that they are actually any different from the ones that have been explained.
(02-08-2011, 09:03 PM)MEAT Wrote: ... all I know is this technology exists.
What technology? Low observable materials? High bandpass quiet engines? Unmanned aerial vehicles? Those all really exist. They've been featured in the technical and common news for years.
Anti-gravity technology? FTL? Death rays? How would you know they exist? Where are you getting this information. Note, I'm not saying they don't exist (although I highly doubt their existence), I'm just asking you how you *know* they exist.
(02-08-2011, 09:03 PM)MEAT Wrote: I don't know if this technology could be used for space travel, but if it could, I imagine mining for minerals on other planets would be very profitable.
Possibly, but probably not. If I remember the theory, it is the churning of the crust that causes pockets of similar materials to clump together and form worthwhile mineral deposits. Earth is the only rocky planet that exhibits that behavior. And the Jovian planets would be a bit hard to set up even robotic mines on.
(02-08-2011, 09:03 PM)MEAT Wrote: I think AUTOMATED flying cars would be safe, fast, and get rid of traffic. I think this technology would help expedite humanitarian efforts globally.
All mechanical systems fail. All computer programs have errors. For flying cars to be safe, they have to have some system that will allow them to land under many types of failure. That's either wings (glide) or rotors (auto-rotate).
(02-08-2011, 09:03 PM)MEAT Wrote: If aliens could somehow survive G-forces that strong, then how could the technology be adapted so we could safely use it? Which brings me back to my original question of the technology behind surviving the G-force, and being able to go those speeds.
Well, there re a few things here. "If aliens ..." Since the existence of those aliens is yet to be shown, postulating their capabilities is a bit premature.
Now, you seem to be confusing 'speed' and 'acceleration'. An aircraft carrier catapult throws you out there so that you hit about 200 kt in a tad less than two seconds. That's somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 to 6 g acceleration.
It doesn't take a big acceleration to get very high velocities. Consider 9 g (about the upper limit for a trained pilot with the appropriate gear. That will put you at about Mach 2.5 in about 10 seconds.
Earth to moon, going ballistic the way we did for the moon landings, took about three days. If we had engines capable of giving us a constant 1 g acceleration, it would take about a day and a half. At 9 g it would take about 1/2 day. The problem isn't high accelerations, the problem is getting any acceleration at all for a long period. And NASA is working on it, with ion engines, solar sails, and more exotic concepts (solar wind ramjets for one straight out of the SF world).
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?