The arsehole Fred Bloggs <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> persisting in being an Off-topic troll... -- Fred Bloggs <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:> X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:29c9:b0:775:8f1f:61ac with SMTP id s9-20020a05620a29c900b007758f1f61acmr211198qkp.6.1699895749556; > Mon, 13 Nov 2023 09:15:49 -0800 (PST) > X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3d4:b0:26d:2b05:4926 with SMTP id > go20-20020a17090b03d400b0026d2b054926mr2126095pjb.1.1699895748922; Mon, 13 > Nov 2023 09:15:48 -0800 (PST) > Path: not-for-mail > Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design > Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2023 09:15:48 -0800 (PST) > In-Reply-To: <rak4lipre2a8p4ifagehq2o894ebaakok3@4ax.com> > Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2601:5cc:4701:5250:d507:bd4:a0b5:c2af; > posting-account=iGtwSwoAAABNNwPORfvAs6OM4AR9GRHt > NNTP-Posting-Host: 2601:5cc:4701:5250:d507:bd4:a0b5:c2af > References: <rak4lipre2a8p4ifagehq2o894ebaakok3@4ax.com> > User-Agent: G2/1.0 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Message-ID: <dfb44dbe-dc95-421f-a74d-e4f88e7ef6a5n@googlegroups.com> > Subject: Re: moon race > From: Fred Bloggs <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> > Injection-Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2023 17:15:49 +0000 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > X-Received-Bytes: 1982
moon race
Started by ●November 13, 2023
Reply by ●November 13, 20232023-11-13
Reply by ●November 13, 20232023-11-13
The arsehole Fred Bloggs <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> persisting in being an Off-topic troll... -- Fred Bloggs <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:> X-Received: by 2002:ac8:58d5:0:b0:41c:b702:a298 with SMTP id u21-20020ac858d5000000b0041cb702a298mr268396qta.3.1699898977943; > Mon, 13 Nov 2023 10:09:37 -0800 (PST) > X-Received: by 2002:a25:d616:0:b0:d9a:c27e:5f37 with SMTP id > n22-20020a25d616000000b00d9ac27e5f37mr199859ybg.3.1699898977606; Mon, 13 Nov > 2023 10:09:37 -0800 (PST) > Path: not-for-mail > Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design > Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2023 10:09:37 -0800 (PST) > In-Reply-To: <u5n4li11gpbgskqobfr6vpm2hl2jmc2s5n@4ax.com> > Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2601:5cc:4701:5250:d507:bd4:a0b5:c2af; > posting-account=iGtwSwoAAABNNwPORfvAs6OM4AR9GRHt > NNTP-Posting-Host: 2601:5cc:4701:5250:d507:bd4:a0b5:c2af > References: <rak4lipre2a8p4ifagehq2o894ebaakok3@4ax.com> <dfb44dbe-dc95-421f-a74d-e4f88e7ef6a5n@googlegroups.com> > <u5n4li11gpbgskqobfr6vpm2hl2jmc2s5n@4ax.com> > User-Agent: G2/1.0 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Message-ID: <67a5b770-9808-45ba-95d1-4410d6a0f706n@googlegroups.com> > Subject: Re: moon race > From: Fred Bloggs <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> > Injection-Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2023 18:09:37 +0000 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > X-Received-Bytes: 2771
Reply by ●November 14, 20232023-11-14
On a sunny day (Mon, 13 Nov 2023 09:31:08 -0800) it happened John Larkin <jl@997PotHill.com> wrote in <u5n4li11gpbgskqobfr6vpm2hl2jmc2s5n@4ax.com>:>On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 09:15:48 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs ><bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote: > >>On Monday, November 13, 2023 at 11:45:05?AM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote: >>> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/concerns-growing-over-the-new-moon-space-race-between-china-and-the-us/ar-AA1jQ6iU >>> >>> This makes no sense to me. Who cares if China or India waste a >>> trillion dollars "establishing norms" on the moon? How many kids are >>> going hungry to bring back more boring moon dirt? >>> >>> And "space" is pretty big. Nobody is going to dominate space. >> >>It's 21st century circus for the fools...both of those places are in dire need of freeing up the geniuses distracted by that >>waste to work on more pressing down to Earth problems, like feeding themselves. > >One argument is that spending resources on NASA equivalents bootstraps >technology in a poor country. I think they have that backwards. > >It's tragic how much North Korea spends on missiles and cannons and >nukes.US is the poorest country on the planet, its debt is the biggest It sells weapons to its own people and others, payed for by that debt and their tax payers. The people are poor, homelessness is extreme, people killing each other for automatic weans, they designed things like COVID, many of their products suck and are expensive, If you look at NASA TV its the same pictures of some guy stepping on the Moon with 'small step for men' EVERY DAY Since the moon trips US has been degeneration endlessly driving around the block in the ISS. Von Braun had a Mars plan, US DID have a design for a nuclear powered rocket, But it all died, even their astronuts by now, now they cannot even, so many years later, do a simple moon landing and return. They deny life was found on Mars, for religious reasons, they steal and suppress, CIA creates tensions and wars wherever it can just to be able to sell weapons. Maybe soon there will be nice Chinese restaurants on Mars, US will have to pay landing rights and pay with Chinese currency. And N Korea together with so many other countries the US Mafia pestered will send their nukes free of charge to N 'merrica What is left of US, well some new 'Columbus' may find that population living in CO2 free grass huts, and history may repeat itself as it seems to have a habit of doing.
Reply by ●November 14, 20232023-11-14
On a sunny day (Mon, 13 Nov 2023 17:22:19 +0000) it happened Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote in <uitm0b$qlvg$1@dont-email.me>:>On 13/11/2023 16:44, John Larkin wrote: >> >> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/concerns-growing-over-the-new-moon-space-race-between-china-and-the-us/ar-AA1jQ6iU >> >> This makes no sense to me. Who cares if China or India waste a >> trillion dollars "establishing norms" on the moon? How many kids are >> going hungry to bring back more boring moon dirt? > >A "space race" is a bit of national willy waving. It certainly beats >holding another world war which is one of the other alternatives... >> >> And "space" is pretty big. Nobody is going to dominate space. > >Space is pretty big but the cavalier launching of small satellites will >sooner or later result in a catastrophic failure whereby many useful >satellite orbits are peppered with debris for a few decades. > >The other way it could happen is if someone uses an anti-satellite >weapon for real. The explosion will create many small fast fragments >still able to cause serious damage but too small and numerous to track. >Then each subsequent collision adds more debris to the most populous orbits. > >https://www.space.com/how-many-satellites-fit-safely-earth-orbit > >Johnathon McD is the goto man for comments on satellites and launches.A US high altitude nuke test killed their Telstar communication satellite with EMP. A few of those nukes will do away with GPS and radio and TV. Then the communication to make those de-orbit nicely will also fail, and those collisions will happen. Not much needed.
Reply by ●November 14, 20232023-11-14
On 13/11/2023 22:58, john larkin wrote:> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 10:09:37 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs > <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Monday, November 13, 2023 at 12:31:49?PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote: >>> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 09:15:48 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs >>> <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Monday, November 13, 2023 at 11:45:05?AM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote: >>>>> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/concerns-growing-over-the-new-moon-space-race-between-china-and-the-us/ar-AA1jQ6iU >>>>> >>>>> This makes no sense to me. Who cares if China or India waste a >>>>> trillion dollars "establishing norms" on the moon? How many kids are >>>>> going hungry to bring back more boring moon dirt? >>>>> >>>>> And "space" is pretty big. Nobody is going to dominate space. >>>> >>>> It's 21st century circus for the fools...both of those places are in dire need of freeing up the geniuses distracted by that waste to work on more pressing down to Earth problems, like feeding themselves. >>> One argument is that spending resources on NASA equivalents bootstraps >>> technology in a poor country. I think they have that backwards. >> >> They're missing the historical context of the western model which is industrial sector expertise bootstraps the big scientific programs, not the other way around.Not true. Science discovers things and industry eventually exploits them. It is sometimes the case that to solve a scientific problem new kit is developed by manufacturers but most of the time academic researchers budgets are so low that they make do with what they can get cheaply plus a lot of time and graduate students working for peanuts.> > Yes, science usually follows invention.Nonsense. Science invents and discovers new things that have no apparent usefulness at the time of their discovery. It is usually a few decades before industry even gets remotely interested in such breakthroughs. Concrete example Rutherford worked on radioactivity because he was advised by his supervisor that there was no real future in Hertzian waves as they would never amount to anything very much. In both instances it was about 4 decades before they really took off big time. He is much less well known for his work on radio waves. Same with the invention of the laser which initially required an insane configuration of very expensive perfect ruby crystal with a custom made flash gun wrapped around it. What earthly use would that ever be? Now we are surrounded by kit that relies on laser light to function. -- Martin Brown
Reply by ●November 14, 20232023-11-14
On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 09:46:24 +0000, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:>On 13/11/2023 22:58, john larkin wrote: >> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 10:09:37 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs >> <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Monday, November 13, 2023 at 12:31:49?PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote: >>>> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 09:15:48 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs >>>> <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Monday, November 13, 2023 at 11:45:05?AM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote: >>>>>> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/concerns-growing-over-the-new-moon-space-race-between-china-and-the-us/ar-AA1jQ6iU >>>>>> >>>>>> This makes no sense to me. Who cares if China or India waste a >>>>>> trillion dollars "establishing norms" on the moon? How many kids are >>>>>> going hungry to bring back more boring moon dirt? >>>>>> >>>>>> And "space" is pretty big. Nobody is going to dominate space. >>>>> >>>>> It's 21st century circus for the fools...both of those places are in dire need of freeing up the geniuses distracted by that waste to work on more pressing down to Earth problems, like feeding themselves. >>>> One argument is that spending resources on NASA equivalents bootstraps >>>> technology in a poor country. I think they have that backwards. >>> >>> They're missing the historical context of the western model which is industrial sector expertise bootstraps the big scientific programs, not the other way around. > >Not true. Science discovers things and industry eventually exploits >them. It is sometimes the case that to solve a scientific problem new >kit is developed by manufacturers but most of the time academic >researchers budgets are so low that they make do with what they can get >cheaply plus a lot of time and graduate students working for peanuts. >> >> Yes, science usually follows invention. > >Nonsense. Science invents and discovers new things that have no apparent >usefulness at the time of their discovery. It is usually a few decades >before industry even gets remotely interested in such breakthroughs. >People built structures and water systems before there was any corresponding science. Basic concepts of sanitation and medical hygiene preceded knowledge of bactria and viruses. We had eyeglasses and telescopes before there was any theory of optics. Franklin and Ohm and Edison and DeForest invented electronics before anyone understood the physics. Steam engines inspired thermodynamics, not the reverse. Chemistry and metallurgy happened before there were chemists and metallurgists. And there are many more examples where tinkerers discover and use causalities and scientists follow up with theory. It's hard to think of a case where science preceded invention, especially pre-1900. Or even now. The laser is a notable exception. E=mc^2 was vastly before its time, but fission would have been discovered anyhow. Stimulated emission was brilliant, even though Einstein thought the laser was impossible. That's a fascinating case where a scientist invented a concept, the inventor and the science establishment declared that it was useless, and an experimenter proved them wrong. Einstein went into the refrigerator businness, but it was a flop.>Concrete example Rutherford worked on radioactivity because he was >advised by his supervisor that there was no real future in Hertzian >waves as they would never amount to anything very much. In both >instances it was about 4 decades before they really took off big time. >He is much less well known for his work on radio waves.Radioactivity was observed and used before there was any corresponding science.> >Same with the invention of the laser which initially required an insane >configuration of very expensive perfect ruby crystal with a custom made >flash gun wrapped around it. What earthly use would that ever be? >Now we are surrounded by kit that relies on laser light to function.Townes invented the maser first, and was almost de-funded because everyone from Einstein down knew that themodynamics forbids net gain from stimulated emission.
Reply by ●November 14, 20232023-11-14
On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 05:53:34 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> wrote:>On a sunny day (Mon, 13 Nov 2023 09:31:08 -0800) it happened John Larkin ><jl@997PotHill.com> wrote in <u5n4li11gpbgskqobfr6vpm2hl2jmc2s5n@4ax.com>: > >>On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 09:15:48 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs >><bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>On Monday, November 13, 2023 at 11:45:05?AM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote: >>>> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/concerns-growing-over-the-new-moon-space-race-between-china-and-the-us/ar-AA1jQ6iU >>>> >>>> This makes no sense to me. Who cares if China or India waste a >>>> trillion dollars "establishing norms" on the moon? How many kids are >>>> going hungry to bring back more boring moon dirt? >>>> >>>> And "space" is pretty big. Nobody is going to dominate space. >>> >>>It's 21st century circus for the fools...both of those places are in dire need of freeing up the geniuses distracted by that >>>waste to work on more pressing down to Earth problems, like feeding themselves. >> >>One argument is that spending resources on NASA equivalents bootstraps >>technology in a poor country. I think they have that backwards. >> >>It's tragic how much North Korea spends on missiles and cannons and >>nukes. > >US is the poorest country on the planet,That's silly.>its debt is the biggestAs a fraction of GDP, it's not. Look it up.>It sells weapons to its own people and others, payed for by that debt and their tax payers. >The people are poor, homelessness is extreme, people killing each other for automatic weans, >they designed things like COVID, many of their products suck >and are expensive,If you don't like american technology, don't use it.
Reply by ●November 14, 20232023-11-14
On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 07:28:25 -0800, John Larkin <jl@997PotHill.com> wrote:>On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 09:46:24 +0000, Martin Brown ><'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote: > >>On 13/11/2023 22:58, john larkin wrote: >>> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 10:09:37 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs >>> <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Monday, November 13, 2023 at 12:31:49?PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 09:15:48 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs >>>>> <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> On Monday, November 13, 2023 at 11:45:05?AM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote: >>>>>>> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/concerns-growing-over-the-new-moon-space-race-between-china-and-the-us/ar-AA1jQ6iU >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This makes no sense to me. Who cares if China or India waste a >>>>>>> trillion dollars "establishing norms" on the moon? How many kids are >>>>>>> going hungry to bring back more boring moon dirt? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And "space" is pretty big. Nobody is going to dominate space. >>>>>> >>>>>> It's 21st century circus for the fools...both of those places are in dire need of freeing up the geniuses distracted by that waste to work on more pressing down to Earth problems, like feeding themselves. >>>>> One argument is that spending resources on NASA equivalents bootstraps >>>>> technology in a poor country. I think they have that backwards. >>>> >>>> They're missing the historical context of the western model which is industrial sector expertise bootstraps the big scientific programs, not the other way around. >> >>Not true. Science discovers things and industry eventually exploits >>them. It is sometimes the case that to solve a scientific problem new >>kit is developed by manufacturers but most of the time academic >>researchers budgets are so low that they make do with what they can get >>cheaply plus a lot of time and graduate students working for peanuts. >>> >>> Yes, science usually follows invention. >> >>Nonsense. Science invents and discovers new things that have no apparent >>usefulness at the time of their discovery. It is usually a few decades >>before industry even gets remotely interested in such breakthroughs. >> > >People built structures and water systems before there was any >corresponding science. Basic concepts of sanitation and medical >hygiene preceded knowledge of bactria and viruses. We had eyeglasses >and telescopes before there was any theory of optics. Franklin and Ohm >and Edison and DeForest invented electronics before anyone understood >the physics. Steam engines inspired thermodynamics, not the reverse. >Chemistry and metallurgy happened before there were chemists and >metallurgists. And there are many more examples where tinkerers >discover and use causalities and scientists follow up with theory. > >It's hard to think of a case where science preceded invention, >especially pre-1900. Or even now. The laser is a notable exception. > >E=mc^2 was vastly before its time, but fission would have been >discovered anyhow. Stimulated emission was brilliant, even though >Einstein thought the laser was impossible. That's a fascinating case >where a scientist invented a concept, the inventor and the science >establishment declared that it was useless, and an experimenter proved >them wrong. > >Einstein went into the refrigerator businness, but it was a flop. > > > > > >>Concrete example Rutherford worked on radioactivity because he was >>advised by his supervisor that there was no real future in Hertzian >>waves as they would never amount to anything very much. In both >>instances it was about 4 decades before they really took off big time. >>He is much less well known for his work on radio waves. > >Radioactivity was observed and used before there was any corresponding >science. > > >> >>Same with the invention of the laser which initially required an insane >>configuration of very expensive perfect ruby crystal with a custom made >>flash gun wrapped around it. What earthly use would that ever be? >>Now we are surrounded by kit that relies on laser light to function. > >Townes invented the maser first, and was almost de-funded because >everyone from Einstein down knew that themodynamics forbids net gain >from stimulated emission.The bipolar transistor was a sort of accident too. The guys were trying to make a fet. I had lunch with Walter Brattain once, on a visit to Bell Labs. I also saw one of the first infrared LEDs, which only worked in liquid nitrogen.
Reply by ●November 14, 20232023-11-14
On Tuesday, November 14, 2023 at 4:46:33 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:> On 13/11/2023 22:58, john larkin wrote: > > On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 10:09:37 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs > > <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On Monday, November 13, 2023 at 12:31:49?PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote: > >>> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 09:15:48 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs > >>> <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> On Monday, November 13, 2023 at 11:45:05?AM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote: > >>>>> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/concerns-growing-over-the-new-moon-space-race-between-china-and-the-us/ar-AA1jQ6iU > >>>>> > >>>>> This makes no sense to me. Who cares if China or India waste a > >>>>> trillion dollars "establishing norms" on the moon? How many kids are > >>>>> going hungry to bring back more boring moon dirt? > >>>>> > >>>>> And "space" is pretty big. Nobody is going to dominate space. > >>>> > >>>> It's 21st century circus for the fools...both of those places are in dire need of freeing up the geniuses distracted by that waste to work on more pressing down to Earth problems, like feeding themselves. > >>> One argument is that spending resources on NASA equivalents bootstraps > >>> technology in a poor country. I think they have that backwards. > >> > >> They're missing the historical context of the western model which is industrial sector expertise bootstraps the big scientific programs, not the other way around. > Not true. Science discovers things and industry eventually exploits > them. It is sometimes the case that to solve a scientific problem new > kit is developed by manufacturers but most of the time academic > researchers budgets are so low that they make do with what they can get > cheaply plus a lot of time and graduate students working for peanuts.Those basic science discoveries, as they're called, are sponsored by industry many times. The development of the transistor is a case in point. If it's just academics and government funding, you usually end up with nothing, there's no real direction. But with industry there's definitely a direction and it points to a market. A more recent example is the rapid development and deployment of the mRNA vaccine. There really wasn't a whole lot happening until big pharma set its sights on a half trillion dollar market, got involved, and made it happen.> > > > Yes, science usually follows invention. > Nonsense. Science invents and discovers new things that have no apparent > usefulness at the time of their discovery. It is usually a few decades > before industry even gets remotely interested in such breakthroughs. > > Concrete example Rutherford worked on radioactivity because he was > advised by his supervisor that there was no real future in Hertzian > waves as they would never amount to anything very much. In both > instances it was about 4 decades before they really took off big time. > He is much less well known for his work on radio waves. > > Same with the invention of the laser which initially required an insane > configuration of very expensive perfect ruby crystal with a custom made > flash gun wrapped around it. What earthly use would that ever be? > Now we are surrounded by kit that relies on laser light to function.The basic science stays a laboratory curiosity until people with vision come along and make use of it.> > -- > Martin Brown
Reply by ●November 14, 20232023-11-14
The arsehole Fred Bloggs <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> persisting in being an Off-topic troll... -- Fred Bloggs <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:> X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:509:b0:66d:a680:f296 with SMTP id px9-20020a056214050900b0066da680f296mr74773qvb.5.1700009408656; > Tue, 14 Nov 2023 16:50:08 -0800 (PST) > X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3d4:b0:26d:2b05:4926 with SMTP id > go20-20020a17090b03d400b0026d2b054926mr3359118pjb.1.1700009408206; Tue, 14 > Nov 2023 16:50:08 -0800 (PST) > Path: not-for-mail > Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design > Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 16:50:07 -0800 (PST) > In-Reply-To: <uivflg$16958$1@dont-email.me> > Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2601:5cc:4701:5250:66:490:3331:d574; > posting-account=iGtwSwoAAABNNwPORfvAs6OM4AR9GRHt > NNTP-Posting-Host: 2601:5cc:4701:5250:66:490:3331:d574 > References: <rak4lipre2a8p4ifagehq2o894ebaakok3@4ax.com> <dfb44dbe-dc95-421f-a74d-e4f88e7ef6a5n@googlegroups.com> > <u5n4li11gpbgskqobfr6vpm2hl2jmc2s5n@4ax.com> <67a5b770-9808-45ba-95d1-4410d6a0f706n@googlegroups.com> > <6ea5li9jd5v2klac279m4499ocbrfh304t@4ax.com> <uivflg$16958$1@dont-email.me> > User-Agent: G2/1.0 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Message-ID: <f10dfb8b-f4a2-443f-864d-9db5857803bcn@googlegroups.com> > Subject: Re: moon race > From: Fred Bloggs <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> > Injection-Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2023 00:50:08 +0000 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > X-Received-Bytes: 5106
