Deb Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 Dynes is not a unit in the current SI (metric system). Undoubtedly as a result of my complaining to the SI commission about my confusion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTK Posted September 23, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 Dynes is not a unit in the current SI (metric system). But it is in the CGS and MKS! g m/s^2 vs. kg m/s^2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooniac15u Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 But it is in the CGS and MKS! g m/s^2 vs. kg m/s^2 Both outdated and superseded by the SI. The unit exists but it is no more part of the current metric system than a stone or a fortnight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 Both outdated and superseded by the SI. The unit exists but it is no more part of the current metric system than a stone or a fortnight. The overwhelming bulk of the global population does not know that "SI" and "metric" are different . . . Besides, my favorite units for measuring speed are Furlongs per Fortnight--it gives some impressively large numbers! And we all like to see big numbers on the old ASI, right??? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTK Posted September 24, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 (edited) What's funny is that we don't use the metric system. Yet the US signed the original agreement on the SI system of units when it was created back in 1875! The Treaty of the Meter. Edited September 24, 2015 by PTK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooniac15u Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 The overwhelming bulk of the global population does not know that "SI" and "metric" are different . . . Besides, my favorite units for measuring speed are Furlongs per Fortnight--it gives some impressively large numbers! And we all like to see big numbers on the old ASI, right??? Do you also run your engine 479 deg Rankine LOP? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 No human will ever go nor should go to Mars. Even if it was technically possible, which I can't see happening, it would be a waste of taxpayers' money. How deeply uninspired. Human's will NEVER go to Mars?! And a waste of taxpayer dollars? Peter Garmin, you do know your beautiful panel would have never existed if....you had been in charge of this nation in the 1960s when we used to be an inspired nation. "We choose to go to the Moon! ...[5] We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things,[6]not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win .." JFK 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 Do you also run your engine 479 deg Rankine LOP? my C won't run LOP, and no engine of any kind that I'm aware of will run 479°R / 479°F / 285°C / 285° K below peak. Most seem to prefer 30-50° F / 17-28° C LOP. Or did you forget that 0°R = -459.6°F = -273°C = 0°K? Trivia to many people, but I spent an entire evening once reworking a homework problem in Jet Propulsion before I noticed one of the temperatures down in the crease where the book was open was in °R rather than the °F I had been fruitlessly calculating with . . . now back to our regularly scheduled thread. If we (mankind) never try anything new, never push our boundaries and never explore, we will halt all growth and progress. Had we never done so, we would still be living in the Savannah's of east Africa, running from lions and scouting for water holes (if you believe the rot taught as evolutionary fact; as an engineer, I believe in entropy the disorder in all systems increases over time without the input of energy and work, all violated by evolutionary theory). 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooniac15u Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 (if you believe the rot taught as evolutionary fact; as an engineer, I believe in entropy the disorder in all systems increases over time without the input of energy and work, all violated by evolutionary theory). The disorder in all systems does not increase at all times. Only the total amount of disorder increases. Energy is constantly input into the system (earth) from the sun. Evolutionary theory does not violate any of the things you mention. In fact it is the only theory that supports all of the observable evidence. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooniac15u Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 my C won't run LOP, and no engine of any kind that I'm aware of will run 479°R / 479°F / 285°C / 285° K below peak. Most seem to prefer 30-50° F / 17-28° C LOP. Or did you forget that 0°R = -459.6°F = -273°C = 0°K? Trivia to many people, but I spent an entire evening once reworking a homework problem in Jet Propulsion before I noticed one of the temperatures down in the crease where the book was open was in °R rather than the °F I had been fruitlessly calculating with . . . I'm sure you're right. It was just an attempt to make a joke about outdated units. I've never used Rankine (or Reaumur for that matter) so I couldn't tell you what the conversion factors are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 now back to our regularly scheduled thread. If we (mankind) never try anything new, never push our boundaries and never explore, we will halt all growth and progress. Had we never done so, we would still be living in the Savannah's of east Africa, running from lions and scouting for water holes (if you believe the rot taught as evolutionary fact; as an engineer, I believe in entropy the disorder in all systems increases over time without the input of energy and work, all violated by evolutionary theory). Those grand thoughts are more the field of statistical physics than of engineering - although for sure any excellent engineer is pretty good at physics. Just naming the taxonomy of fields... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 I'm sure you're right. It was just an attempt to make a joke about outdated units. I've never used Rankine (or Reaumur for that matter) so I couldn't tell you what the conversion factors are. Rankin is the Absolute version of Fahrenheit, just as Kelvin is Celsius moved to the absolute scale. Absolute Zero = -459.6ºF = -273ºC. Fortunately, we fly in the lower atmosphere and don't need to worry about this. The Saturn series was designed to leave the atmosphere, where the shady areas drop to near this number. The dark side of the moon drops pretty cold, and interstellar regions are supposed to be in the single-digit Kelvin range [pretty durn cold!]. Just one more thing to overcome on a journey through the Solar System, where the side facing the sun will be much warmer than the side facing away, at least out through around Mars or a little past. The Voyagers are now extra-solar and should be experiencing the joys of very low Kelvin/Rankin temperatures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 The disorder in all systems does not increase at all times. Only the total amount of disorder increases. Energy is constantly input into the system (earth) from the sun. Evolutionary theory does not violate any of the things you mention. In fact it is the only theory that supports all of the observable evidence. That all depends on the assumptions underlying both your theories and the evidence you are observing. And no, one cannot "observe" things without some underlying assumptions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTK Posted September 24, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 (edited) Not only will humans never go to Mars, we'll never go back to the moon! During the Apollo years in the 60's when we went to the moon NASA's budget was around 5% of the federal budget. Today it's about 1% and shrinking. It was an easy sell back then due to the cold war and national security. Today it's not that easy to sell it to the taxpayer. Whatever a human can do a robot can do better and cheaper and without risking loss of life. Edited September 24, 2015 by PTK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooniac15u Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 That all depends on the assumptions underlying both your theories and the evidence you are observing. And no, one cannot "observe" things without some underlying assumptions. Assumptions are necessary at the beginning but the iterative process of evaluating a theory relative to new evidence tends to balance out initial assumptions. This only works if you are truly willing to challenge preconceived notions based upon new evidence. Those that are opposed to evolutionary theory tend to start with a strongly held belief system based upon ancient texts. Please understand that I consider myself a religious person but I am also a scientist. The scientific evidence for evolution (when viewed from an unbiased perspective) simply does not support a literal interpretation of the biblical creation story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piloto Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 (edited) Back when Epcot opened in Orlando in 1982 I remember exhibits portraying underwater cities for human living. 33 years later I don't see them. And the technology is here at a much lower cost than living on Mars or the Moon. There is simply no economic or social interest in colonizing where your way of living is limited by the environment (breathing from a tank). More appealing would be living on a desert island with a hammock between two palm tress drinking pina colada. Back in the Apollo days everyone though the Russians were going to set military bases on the moon. For what purpose? Who knows. Maybe to tip over the US lunar module on the moon. José Edited September 24, 2015 by Piloto 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 Not only will humans never go to Mars, we'll never go back to the moon! During the Apollo years in the 60's when we went to the moon NASA's budget was around 5% of the federal budget. Today it's about 1% and shrinking. It was an easy sell back then due to the cold war and national security. Today it's not that easy to sell it to the taxpayer. Whatever a human can do a robot can do better and cheaper and without risking loss of life. Forever and Never is a very long time. If you said that it will never happen in your lifetime, or maybe even your children's or grand children's life times then I could take your confident statement as having some serious meaning of opinion and I would have to admit we just don't know. But to state that you know that sometime will never happen 10 years from now, or 100 years from now or a 1000 years from now is just silly. Look at the world 1000 years ago. 100 years ago. Do you think our world, our system of government, our technology and economy will resemble anything like today 1000 years from now? Who knows, we may even go to the Moon 500 years from now but end u annihilating selves before 1000 years. We just don't now and I reject your statement that you know as nothing more than bravado. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTK Posted September 24, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 (edited) You're free to think what you wish. Bravado implies pretentious. Definitely not I! I'm a realist with a firm grip on reality. I see things for what they are and not what others want to make me believe they are. The circumstances were such that we felt humbled by the USSR sphere of influence. Gagarin was first human in space. Little Cuba kicked our CIA in the ass. See Bay of Pigs. The Soviets had beat us in sending Gagarin to space so we had to beat them in going to the moon. Today the circumstances are different. Edited September 24, 2015 by PTK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 You're free to think what you wish. Bravado implies pretentious. Definitely not I! Yes I know what the word means. I find it to be bravado that you know the future for the next 1000 years and beyond. Think what you think it is a free country for sure, but I find such confidence in the unknowable to be pretentious bravado. I'm a realist with a firm grip on reality. I see things for what they are and not what others want to make me believe they are. The circumstances were such that we felt humbled by the USSR. Gagarin was first human in space. Little Cuba kicked our CIA in the ass. See Bay of Pigs. The Soviets had beat us in sending Gagarin to space so we had to beat them in going to the moon. Today the circumstances are different. Yes, I agree - unlikely to happen in the current world environment with current technology. I agree things were different 40 and 50 years ago. World politics were different. Doubting that any of what is today's environment will be identical for the next foreverness. I am calling it bravado that you claim to know that it will stay the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yetti Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 How deeply uninspired. Human's will NEVER go to Mars?! And a waste of taxpayer dollars? Peter Garmin, you do know your beautiful panel would have never existed if....you had been in charge of this nation in the 1960s when we used to be an inspired nation. "We choose to go to the Moon! ...[5] We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things,[6]not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win .." JFK The first computers were created for business applications, so not really sure that we need the space programs to navigate by our smart phones. All the other stuff in our planes came out of the war time flying. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 The first computers were created for business applications, so not really sure that we need the space programs to navigate by our smart phones. All the other stuff in our planes came out of the war time flying. yes, I agree - we can always start another war. Medicine and technology always benefit from a good war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yetti Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 (edited) I was thinking about that the other day.... for a supposedly peaceful nation we have been at war with someone for most of our history. It almost makes you want to add up all the years of conflict and figure out the percentage It is also interesting how many droves and droves of bombers were launched in WWII and only 5-10 remain Edited September 24, 2015 by Yetti Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTK Posted September 24, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 I don't have an issue with space exploration as long as private dollars are used. I don't want to waste my tax dollars to learn that there is ice on Mars and maybe liquid water. It doesn't excite me. We have ice and water on Earth. I don't want my tax dollars wasted chasing some dreamers that we may find life on Mars or somewhere else. I really don't care. We have human beings starving and dying here on Earth. When we solve all our problems here then we can talk about space. Let's get our priorities straight. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 The first computers were created for business applications, so not really sure that we need the space programs to navigate by our smart phones. All the other stuff in our planes came out of the war time flying. The basic design of our airplanes was advanced immeasurably by advances made in WWI and WWII. All of the new whoop-de-doo bells and whistles that everyone is gaga about are derived at least partially from the space program, which is NASA [i.e., our tax dollars at work]. Microminiature electronics, GPS, many of the fine sensors that present all of the information on your engine monitor, satellite communications, laser technology, etc. NASA did the research [the expensive part], and private enterprise picked it up and ran with it. What will we get from attempting to go to Mars? More than anyone can ever imagine. Spend them tax dollars! If not, Congress will find a way to waste them to buy votes so the crooks already there can stay in power. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatoreb Posted September 24, 2015 Report Share Posted September 24, 2015 I don't have an issue with space exploration as long as private dollars are used. I don't want to waste my tax dollars to learn that there is ice on Mars and maybe liquid water. It doesn't excite me. We have ice and water on Earth. I don't want my tax dollars wasted chasing some dreamers that we may find life on Mars or somewhere else. I really don't care. We have human beings starving and dying here on Earth. When we solve all our problems here then we can talk about space. Let's get our priorities straight. I was just egging you on because you said you knew it would never happen. Now I totally respect what you said in this paragraph - you don't like the idea for the reasons you said, and you don't think it should happen. There is your opinion and you have every right to it. Bless. My opinion happens to be opposite yours in this issue but we both like Mooneys so we'll always have that to share. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.