420chan now has a web-based IRC client available, right here
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Name
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
A subject is required when posting a new thread
Subject
Comment
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich


Community Updates

420chan now supports HTTPS! If you find any issues, you may report them in this thread
Hey Nerds by Antony Hewish - Sun, 23 Jul 2017 18:26:46 EST ID:Fbpr3rrr No.56982 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1500848806452.png -(45948B / 44.87KB, 600x224) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 45948
I was wondering why you guys post here? Aren't these boards ungodly slow? Wouldn't it be easier for you to just go to an actual forum for space discussion? Why wait so long for a reply from some drug addict about stars or whatever when you can probably get better information more quickly from somewhere else?

Not judging, just genuinely curious
8 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
James van Allen - Sat, 05 Aug 2017 18:28:59 EST ID:unNII3om No.56996 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56986

It's slow as long as humanity is yet to invent near-light-speed travel. If this board was moving near light-speed, the time between posts would be fucking fast relative to us.

>>56994

Shh it's ok. As long as it is just space expanding, two objects can actually 'move' faster than light relative to each other and no physical laws are broken.
>>
Joseph Lockyer - Mon, 14 Aug 2017 17:13:08 EST ID:ggsDPq/T No.56999 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56996

But doesn't speed only exist relative to two objects???
>>
Viktor Ambartsumian - Thu, 17 Aug 2017 19:17:33 EST ID:unNII3om No.57002 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503011853487.jpg -(9195B / 8.98KB, 199x250) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>56999

Yep. Humanity and the Grays my man. They are here, they are posting, and they are monitoring this very board.
>>
hokusai - Sat, 19 Aug 2017 11:26:42 EST ID:LIO8YU+/ No.57003 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503156402506.jpg -(308260B / 301.04KB, 1024x682) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
havent read the thread but i dont thing faster than light travel is possible the way it will be done is not by moving objects but consciousness around space outside time thats why i post here and not in a science forum
>>
Margaret Burbidge - Sun, 20 Aug 2017 05:14:34 EST ID:PovkMdyu No.57005 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Is there really any faster forum than a chance? I mean besides ones filled with terms like "social media"


Perseid meteor shower! by Johann Encke - Wed, 31 Jul 2013 11:29:34 EST ID:evrPe8Vs No.51233 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1375284574338.jpg -(3913B / 3.82KB, 262x192) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 3913
AWWWW YEAAAH.
Anyone else gonna observe this beautiful event?


Incase you haven't heard from AUG 12th to the 13th between 10:30PM and 4:30 AM, The sky's gonna light up with massive fireballs brighter than Jupiter.
38 posts and 5 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Edwin Hubble - Sat, 01 Oct 2016 12:47:50 EST ID:r8ZHfF3E No.56504 Ignore Report Quick Reply
It was considerably longer last year and it was visible in the city.
We must have been in the outskirts of the geminid
>>
Gerard Kuiper - Wed, 09 Aug 2017 18:42:14 EST ID:/VSfubHK No.56997 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1502318534003.jpg -(128400B / 125.39KB, 774x1000) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Anyone going to observe this year's Perseid meteor shower?
>>
Ejnar Hertzprung - Fri, 11 Aug 2017 21:32:32 EST ID:1mtUMsxL No.56998 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1502501552776.jpg -(396723B / 387.42KB, 804x932) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>56997
You bet your sweet ass, Kuiper!
>>
Wilhelm Beer - Tue, 15 Aug 2017 00:15:44 EST ID:uuw9w7i5 No.57000 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I did not know this was annual

you failed me Sagan
>>
William Lassell - Sat, 19 Aug 2017 22:02:46 EST ID:dG4sHLwu No.57004 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I caught sight of seven or so. Too bad it was too cloudy most of the time. Really want to go out of the city for next year.


Books! by William Lassell - Fri, 28 Jul 2017 19:52:00 EST ID:CtWYD6pG No.56988 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1501285920626.jpg -(198314B / 193.67KB, 720x480) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 198314
Can you recommend me soke books on the universe in general. Like books on astrophysics , black holes or planets. Thank you.
>>
Bernhard Schmidt - Wed, 16 Aug 2017 23:44:30 EST ID:nRjWggLk No.57001 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1502941470147.jpg -(34181B / 33.38KB, 250x394) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>56988


You don't understand galactic scales; Relativity is a bitch thread by Kiyotsugu Hirayama - Thu, 04 May 2017 18:10:19 EST ID:unNII3om No.56931 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1493935819961.png -(221879B / 216.68KB, 521x311) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 221879
So imagine you have two cannons firing their cannon balls away from each other, and their muzzle velocity is the speed of light.

You'd think the relative speed of one cannon ball to the other would be 2x the speed of light, right?

Nope. The equation for relative speed between two objects looks like this:

>v1+2=v1+v2/(1+v1v2/c^2)

Where v1 and v2 are the speeds of the two cannon balls and c is the speed of light.

So as the velocity of the cannon balls approaches the speed of light, their own speed doesn't matter and the limit of light speed is dominant. Relative speed of 2x speed of light is thus impossible.

Or in other words: wat.


You guys got some other relativistic mind-blowers?
15 posts and 2 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Edward Pickering - Thu, 06 Jul 2017 16:09:41 EST ID:unNII3om No.56974 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56972

If I understand the theory correctly, the speed of light is what it is because that's the constant "speed limit" of the universe. Light itself can travel slower if it's in a medium where it can interact with matter, which is why you get refraction in water for example, but once in a vacuum it travels as fast as it can.
>>
Joseph Taylor Jr. - Sun, 09 Jul 2017 11:58:05 EST ID:unNII3om No.56976 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56972

To explain a bit further: Light is mass-less, and from this we can 'assume' that its velocity in a vacuum should be infinite. This of course is impossible, so its speed is exactly the maximum speed possible. The reason why this limit exists and why it's a constant and not relative itself is because it's deeply tied into the general laws of physics, which we assume at least are universal everywhere.
>>
Maximilian Wolf - Sat, 29 Jul 2017 13:55:31 EST ID:+G8ef2Iy No.56989 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56976
Light isn't really devoid of mass, it simply has no rest mass. Using the concept of mass you are is a bit of an outdated/antiquated concept. As it relates most specifically to this situation, the difference between a particle or an object's mass and rest mass is that it takes into account what we learned about mass and energy through the lens of Special Relativity. Things that are accelerating (acceleration is an important distinction to make here because in space it's not really possible to establish fixed frames of reference and whatnot) have more mass than things that are not accelerating. Until the acceleration approaches velocities very near the speed of light, however, the difference in mass is pretty much infinitesimal and therefore pretty much negligible.


>>56972
The guy that responded to you is right, light does travel at velocities less than what the speed of light is measured at in a true vacuum. However, most of known the observable universe where otherwise nothing appears to exist is actually a false vacuum. A true vacuum is characterized by the lowest possible energy state, but a false vacuum just happens to be the local minimum (keeping in mind local can encompass some pretty vast sectors of space). If I remember correctly, in areas that there appears to be nothing and you'd expect it to be vacuum, there are actually photons left over from the Big Bang (hence being able to measure the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation).

As for why the speed limit couldn't be higher... You just have to think about it for a minute. All measurements, whether they're of speed/velocity, distance, or what have you, are relative to other measurements. That's why we establish a basic unit that we can more or less view as arbitrary that we can use to orient ourselves and make sense out of the measurements we make. The speed of light just is what it is. What numbers and measurements we assign we to it are entirely for our benefit and as long as you're decent at math it's pretty easy to manipulate things so that the numbers could be higher or whatever.

But, what you meant more specifically is why the speed of light not able to be faster, not why our n…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
William Lassell - Wed, 02 Aug 2017 17:06:58 EST ID:uSMmLmww No.56992 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56989
i am going to think about your words, max. ed's and joseph's too, thanks fellas.
>>
Harlow Shapley - Wed, 02 Aug 2017 20:26:06 EST ID:d6k0JkjC No.56993 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56972
TLDR: Because light is a self-propagating electro-magnetic wave per Maxel's Equations.

http://www.wikihow.com/Derive-the-Speed-of-Light-from-Maxwell%27s-Equations


The Night Sky. by George Herbig - Thu, 06 Jul 2017 19:26:48 EST ID:5rTlMpAv No.56975 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1499383608371.jpg -(818025B / 798.85KB, 1920x1271) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 818025
It was late august and the skies were perfect out in the cornfields of Nebraska,
It was the darkest I've ever seen, I couldn't see my hand in front of me, let alone the stalks.

After about half an hour of stumbling through the field trying to find my spot, (a clearing that my friend used to grow weed) I finally stumbled upon a small trail that led to the clearing.

In the clearing there was a trailer, a lawnchair, a cooler and a telescope. I turned on my lantern and went into the trailer. There were stalks of weed hanging on clotheslines as well as a few pills scattered on a table with a note that said "help yourself", with a winky face alongside a condom.

I thought it was a prank, but I thought I might as well so I took the pills all at once and shaved off a nug branch of uncured weed and smoked it the best I could. Anyway I got out my telescope and used my night-sky app on my phone to find the planets (yeah I know, I'm lazy).

As I was focusing in on Saturn I noticed my vision started to blur a bit. I thought at first the lense was just out of focus but I soon found that something was happening. I continued my search anyway, the best I could until I could no longer keep up.

I decided to just chill on a tarp and watch the stars instead, see If I could make out the ISS and other satellites. I started thinking about how those stars are actually clusters of galaxies that are probably gone, it made me sad but then I felt something.

My dick was hard as a rock., On top of that the stars wouldn't stay still. It was bothering the fuck out of me until it didn't. I started to see my own constellations, they turned into titties and even full on line-porn.
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
Joseph Taylor Jr. - Sun, 23 Jul 2017 22:19:45 EST ID:s0XmRX5r No.56983 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1500862785238.jpg -(12483B / 12.19KB, 419x313) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
havent heard that one before


Cassini by Edward Barnard - Wed, 26 Apr 2017 09:23:19 EST ID:rmFM08wB No.56925 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1493212999892.jpg -(688640B / 672.50KB, 1920x1080) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 688640
No Cassini thread? Think we'll find anything we weren't expecting in dem rings?
3 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Fred Whipple - Sat, 29 Apr 2017 14:23:19 EST ID:7jcVAyVz No.56930 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56928
No but there is that exoplanet made entirely out of diamonds we found. I bet that guy would get pretty jazzed about that.
>>
Urbain Le Verrier - Wed, 12 Jul 2017 23:42:29 EST ID:PCoQRQWz No.56977 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1499917349071.png -(125278B / 122.34KB, 1440x453) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Almost. Almost…
>>
Alan Guth - Thu, 13 Jul 2017 18:48:31 EST ID:unNII3om No.56978 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56977

Aw man, what a downer.
>>
George Herbig - Fri, 14 Jul 2017 03:51:43 EST ID:nRjWggLk No.56979 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1500018703267.jpg -(12257B / 11.97KB, 300x300) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>56977
>>
Paul Goldsmith - Wed, 19 Jul 2017 14:04:24 EST ID:yxm0fECC No.56981 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56977
shouldn't a bunch of scientists be able to at least count properly?


oh cool by Pierre-Simon Laplace - Tue, 18 Jul 2017 14:04:36 EST ID:T69KfNA1 No.56980 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1500401076802.jpg -(18663B / 18.23KB, 236x214) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 18663
imagine what planet discovering when listening to thids
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vj-3bafIMI


black holes by analnonymphus - Sun, 25 Jun 2017 08:49:44 EST ID:M9cvTU1A No.56960 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1498394984920.jpg -(14146B / 13.81KB, 259x194) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 14146
so cern was built and there were quite a few expermiments done there, now i am wondering why we are shooting particles through earth "for different reasons" are we measuring for a difference in gravity? also i read an really awkward article about alot of stars and planets naturally containing black holes (sounds like the cancer lie to me - its natural and in every body in low amounts- and i have cancer and know how i got it - chemically) so whats goind on here? possibly does anyone know the maths to how fast a black hole grows? just asking ...
1 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
analnonymphus - Sun, 25 Jun 2017 13:39:03 EST ID:M9cvTU1A No.56962 Ignore Report Quick Reply
so how man particles smaller than atoms are there around to float threw earth and what is their mass, also what mass must a black hole have to be able to suck up basic elements like iron( or heavier) from the earths core? cant do the math since i have a braintumor! ... just wondering though i didnt make the black hole or the plans behind it!
>>
Bruon Rossi - Sun, 25 Jun 2017 15:28:04 EST ID:2fBRstom No.56964 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56962
Black holes don't suck. They have the same gravitational attraction as anything with the same mass. They just pack that mass in a small enough volume that internal gravity overcomes all the other forces.

As for particles, I don't get what you're asking, man.
>>
analnonymphus - Sun, 25 Jun 2017 17:15:26 EST ID:yhLhjf2W No.56965 Ignore Report Quick Reply
just wondering how a miniature black hole in earths core would start feeding, would it be particles and atomdust from space? would it already initially be molten metals?
>>
analnonymphus - Sun, 25 Jun 2017 17:17:20 EST ID:yhLhjf2W No.56966 Ignore Report Quick Reply
by particles i mean bosons and fermions
>>
Henry Draper - Thu, 29 Jun 2017 01:38:31 EST ID:kjgELPni No.56968 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56966
You're reaching into subject matter that I think you probably need more reference knowledge for to be able to integrate fully. Probably best to just not worry about such things in that case.
But, the idea that there could be microscopic black holes capable of passing through the earth is just from one study by one physicist, as a way to explain something that probably has a much simpler explanation i.e. the LHC doesn't generate micro black holes simply because the LHC isn't capable of generating micro black holes . The accepted explanation concerning black holes in the standard model is that they continually lose mass due to Hawking radiation, and thus eventually evaporate completely, so by most physicists estimation, long lived subatomic scale black holes don't exist.

If there were a black hole in the center of the earth, then the center of the earth would fall into its event horizon, which would subsequently expand. In short order, the entire earth would be within the black hole. Anything that comes into physical contact with the event horizon becomes a part of the black hole, and since the center of the earth is completely pressurized with no vacuous space, it would consume the earth more or less instantaneously from our perspective, from the inside out.

The amount of the mass that subatomic particles, that could pass through such an object that weren't already part of the earth's mass -- like neutrinos burrowing through from the sun, would contribute to the total mass of an earth-consuming black hole would be vanishingly negligible, more or less equivalent to the number of neutrinos that pass through the earth during the time it took the black hole to consume it, (which would again, would on the order of seconds, perhaps minutes) pico grams of substance compared to the earth's 5x10^24 Kgs.


SpaceX by Gerard Kuiper - Mon, 21 Dec 2015 21:08:08 EST ID:UJHLFL7d No.55894 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1450750088931.png -(168254B / 164.31KB, 600x488) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 168254
WE FUCKING DID IT
69 posts and 20 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Awe' God !!vVWR8L52 - Tue, 23 May 2017 05:02:51 EST ID:vO6WOJQs No.56945 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I hope they unban you soon my comrade, you were one of the very few that kept me coming back to this forum. You, Bombastus, Void, Fiend and a few others... Thank you for all that you were able to share that I was able to receive and farewell for now.
>>
Awe' God !!vVWR8L52 - Tue, 23 May 2017 05:04:26 EST ID:vO6WOJQs No.56946 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>55997
To A Wizard
>>
Samsara Siddhartha - Fri, 16 Jun 2017 09:36:59 EST ID:mhvoJT06 No.56954 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>55894
Hot off the presses! Freely available until July 5th! <spoiler>Unless you http://sci-hub.io/</spoiler>
http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/space.2017.29009.emu
>>
Samsara Siddhartha - Fri, 16 Jun 2017 09:38:50 EST ID:mhvoJT06 No.56955 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56954
Fail!
also this https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/06/air-force-budget-reveals-how-much-spacex-undercuts-launch-prices/
>>
Samsara Siddhartha - Mon, 26 Jun 2017 11:16:24 EST ID:VzPcpzRp No.56967 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The winning continues
https://www.theverge.com/2017/6/25/15870934/spacex-second-launch-weekend-rocket-landing-success-falcon-9-landing


Other worlds by William Herschel - Tue, 08 Nov 2016 04:19:55 EST ID:FFHdMrF/ No.56642 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1478596795359.jpg -(177015B / 172.87KB, 1024x1024) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 177015
Do you think we will be capable to leave our solar system one day? Or that getting even to the closest star is impossible.
6 posts and 2 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Pierre-Simon Laplace - Fri, 24 Feb 2017 23:19:23 EST ID:r2zIu0Bs No.56842 Ignore Report Quick Reply
YA
>>
Johan Galle - Fri, 09 Jun 2017 21:22:20 EST ID:R3YApPtx No.56949 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56694
>>56694
>pre-1000 AD
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrolabe
>>
Johan Galle - Sat, 10 Jun 2017 10:34:25 EST ID:4TAnvNaP No.56950 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56642
I don't think we'll be capable of making it to Alpha Centauri any time soon. Possibly not at all. Unless we can figure out a warp drive or something, we'd have to be going in generational ships.
That may be possible in a few hundred years (assuming we do) after we've colonized our system, pulled tons and tons of resources out of the asteroid belt and have plenty of manpower and resources to spare.
Assuming that everything goes smoothly, and we're able to settle the solar system, it's definitely possible. If we are able to efficiently mine asteroids and other planets, and build sustainable colonies, we should have abundant resources to make long voyages.
In The Expanse series there is a group of Mormons that pool up resources to take a massive generational ship to some nearby star system. I could see something like that happening, whether it's a religion that finds the will to do it, or a government project, or even just a private project.
So it's definitely possible, it's just that we've got to get well settled in our own solar system first. Really, it's fairly easy to conceive, but we'd have to pass many political, scientific, social and economical road bumps to get to the point of being able to.
>>
Subramanyan Chandrasekhar - Sat, 10 Jun 2017 16:28:00 EST ID:unNII3om No.56952 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56950

Just an interesting consequence of relativity: As you approach the speed of light, time slows down. While the trip might take decades or centuries from our perspective, it can take significantly less from the perspective of the travelers. With an efficient enough vessel, traveling to Alpha Centauri can theoretically be done without generation-ships.
>>
William Lassell - Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:10:24 EST ID:iClpwVzv No.56958 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56952
Even without time dilation, Alpha Centauri isn't that far.
If we could accelerate at 1g halfway, then decelerate at 1g the other half, it would only take 6 years without time dilation (3.5 years with dilation).
That kind of acceleration is a tall order though.
At only one tenth of a g, it's still only about 13.6 years to an outside observer.
Google "relativistic star ship calculator". I like the one from convertalot.com


Fermi Paradox... why? by Henrietta Levitt - Thu, 22 May 2014 00:54:34 EST ID:ILYTISHs No.53812 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1400734474447.png -(111524B / 108.91KB, 400x325) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 111524
Another thread made me start thinking about this. The Fermi Paradox states (thanks, Wikipedia):

>The Sun is a young star. There are billions of stars in the galaxy that are billions of years older;
>Some of these stars probably have Earth-like planets which, if the Earth is typical, may develop intelligent life;
>Presumably, some of these civilizations will develop interstellar travel, a technology Earth is investigating even now, such as that used in the proposed 100 Year Starship;
>At any practical pace of interstellar travel, the galaxy can be completely colonized in a few tens of millions of years.

If that's the case, why haven't we been colonized already, or at least seen evidence of intelligent life somewhere in our galaxy?

My take: either A) Life takes a long time to develop, and somehow, improbably, we're the first planet to develop an intelligent civilization in our galaxy, or at least one of the first. We don't see anyone else because there isn't anyone else to see... yet, or we're all still too far apart.

Or b) Given the size and composition constraints of a planet able to foster and sustain life (as far as we know, "habitable zone," big enough to have an atmosphere, small enough to still be rocky, etc.) and continue long enough for said life to begin to explore the galaxy, the home planet simply runs out of resources before meaningful headway can be made. I think this is more of a slow-death kind of thing where maybe we get to do some exploration within the solar system and maybe a bit beyond for a while, but overpopulation, war, disease, famine, and whatever else causes us to realign our priorities from space exploration to merely sustaining life on our own planet. A civilization that had the foresight to know something like that was happening could theoretically, if they had the goal of galactic expansion from the start, avoid this situation, but the problem is that NO civilization has that kind of 10,000 year plan from the get-go, and they all sputter out right before they could have pulled it off. There's not a textbook on "how to succeed as a species" that gets handed out to a life form when it develops self-awareness,…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
297 posts and 69 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Johan Galle - Fri, 09 Jun 2017 21:19:11 EST ID:R3YApPtx No.56948 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56914
The problem is that we, as humans, seem to have a hangup with the cost-benefit of a multi-year (or multi-decade) space journey. If it takes most of/more than a human lifetime to go somewhere, we'll have a sorta-hard time finding volunteers, but a really, really hard time funding it. The payoff is too far away and too abstract for anyone to really throw the necessary money at it. We'd need another, even more forward-thinking, Elon Musk.
>>
Subramanyan Chandrasekhar - Sat, 10 Jun 2017 16:21:52 EST ID:unNII3om No.56951 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56948

Oh we would not have a shortage of volunteers. History shows we got something of a pioneer spirit. Just look at how easy that Dutch Mars colonization/reality show programme got willing people.

I think most of all it chalks down to the reality of our current era: America landed men on the moon during a mission way before its time; yet they did it several times. Now the on-board computer of the Apollo missions was state of the art back then, like the rest of the mission, yet today we have more computing power in our pockets. Not to mention new materials, techniques and logistics which really brings down the cost quite a lot. Our real hang-up is the lack of competition. There's no big red baddie to beat today. Quite a lot of space exploration today are done through cooperation as well.

In other words there's little prestige in it, so we're left to the whims of benefactors like Elon Musk or simply watching developing countries like China and India close the head start of the European powers. This is rather comparable to the age of colonization, where initial colonies would only turn a profit at least a generation down the line; though nations still kept on colonizing because of the whole competitive game between empires.
>>
xToksik_Revolutionx - Sat, 10 Jun 2017 20:58:39 EST ID:2Fu5b/aO No.56953 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Oh God not the Goa'uld!
>>
Pierre-Simon Laplace - Fri, 23 Jun 2017 15:37:48 EST ID:Oy3eGjJE No.56956 Ignore Report Quick Reply
All intelligent aliens are plants, and they can't get here because they're rooted to the ground
>>
William Lassell - Fri, 23 Jun 2017 16:56:00 EST ID:iClpwVzv No.56957 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1498251360210.jpg -(108839B / 106.29KB, 1024x728) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>56956
Nice.
Or maybe the standard for intelligent, tool-bearing, spaceship-creating life in the galaxy is a species (or a bunch of species) that come from worlds very different from our own.
Most stars in the galaxy are red dwarfs, but people from a red-dwarf world might not want to move here, the star's all wrong.


hello by James Christy - Mon, 05 Jun 2017 01:21:18 EST ID:q0uQNHgr No.56947 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1496640078396.png -(242222B / 236.54KB, 480x800) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 242222
This man says he brings peace. Wut?


Pages Next>>
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.