Well, it's the lead story on the BBC ..

It's disappointing that gravitational waves only travel at the speed of light but can one surf on them? Inquiring minds need to know.
 
sphexx said:
It's disappointing that gravitational waves only travel at the speed of light but can one surf on them? Inquiring minds need to know.
Click to expand...
Good question.
They are not like a physical water wave - in the same way you can't surf on a radio wave ( which is an oscillation of magnetic and electric fields vibrating in sympathy but at right angles to one another). Gravity waves are ripples travelling through the fabric of space-time. As the wave passes through you it will stretch and then squash you by a small amount. Also there will be a slight variation in your experience of the passage of time relative to other parts of your body as it propagates through you. Fortunately, the effect is so small you won't notice it.
 
What we need is for a really, really, REALLY massive event to generate some much bigger ripples.

Then things could get quite funky. :D
 
ZoneV said:
What we need is for a really, really, REALLY massive event to generate some much bigger ripples.

Then things could get quite funky. :D
Click to expand...
Not sure such a huge event could be described as funky - however it's quite easy to experience a moderate warp in the fabric of space-time. Go up a high building and fling yourself off the top - the few seconds as you free fall you are experiencing the path taken by a body in a deformation of the fabric of space-time ( produced by the mass of our planet).
 
Nah, massive ripples in space-time would be much more fun.
 
Last edited:
Cobra said:
"The ocean covers 71 percent of the Earth's surface and contains 97 percent of the planet's water,
yet more than 95 percent of the underwater world remains unexplored.
The ocean and lakes play an integral role in many of the Earth's systems including climate and weather".


And that doesn't include rain forests and mountain ranges, that are also as yet unexplored.

I think we should be looking down here, discovering what the Earth has to offer, rather than floating around in space, to no practical end.
Click to expand...
Which is the equivalent of the dumb Facebook posts like 'we should stop paying foreign aid and pay nurses more'.

It's not either / or we should be doing both.
 
Phil V said:
It's not either / or we should be doing both.
Click to expand...
I kind of agree with you but at the same time I the bias on both should be closer to home.
 
Cobra said:
I kind of agree with you but at the same time I the bias on both should be closer to home.
Click to expand...

Interesting; could you give me a current breakdown? Ecologists and biologists versus astronomers? Both in numbers working and $ spent?

Notwithstanding the number of brilliant inventions that help us every day that have come out of the space programme are immense.
 
Phil V said:
Interesting; could you give me a current breakdown? Ecologists and biologists versus astronomers? Both in numbers working and $ spent?
Click to expand...
I'm sure if you looked you could find the information, I personally CBA to find it for you though.
But we hear it all the time from the media and other places that, to quote your example, the medical profession is sorely under funded.
Are you saying they are wrong?
Phil V said:
Notwithstanding the number of brilliant inventions that help us every day that have come out of the space programme are immense
Click to expand...
There were also some pretty good advances from WWII, indeed space travel, (V2 Rockets) And of course splitting the atom, ... that ended badly for a whole race of people, does the end justify the means?
 
Cobra said:
But we hear it all the time from the media and other places that, to quote your example, the medical profession is sorely under funded.
Are you saying they are wrong? ...
Click to expand...
Well, yes ... and no! Can you conceive of any time when <insert name here> couldn't use more money. It's all relative, as I'm sure you know, which gets us back on topic ;-)
 
Cobra said:
But we hear it all the time from the media and other places that, to quote your example, the medical profession is sorely under funded.
Are you saying they are wrong?
Click to expand...

I wonder how much less underfunded they would be if they weren't so over-administrated by non-clinical management ;)
 
viv1969 said:
I wonder how much less underfunded they would be if they weren't so over-administrated by non-clinical management ;)
Click to expand...
It never hurts to start at the top does it?
 
Human exploration is a great thing. It's hard-wired into our behaviour and without it, we would never have left Africa. Long may it continue, and long may our astronauts continue to educate and inspire our younger generation of budding scientists to think big and reach for the stars. :)
 
viv1969 said:
I wonder how much less underfunded they would be if they weren't so over-administrated by non-clinical management ;)
Click to expand...

Could you define the terms "over-administrated" and "non-clinical management" please Ruth

Anthony.
 
Cobra said:
"The ocean covers 71 percent of the Earth's surface and contains 97 percent of the planet's water,
yet more than 95 percent of the underwater world remains unexplored.
The ocean and lakes play an integral role in many of the Earth's systems including climate and weather".


And that doesn't include rain forests and mountain ranges, that are also as yet unexplored.

I think we should be looking down here, discovering what the Earth has to offer, rather than floating around in space, to no practical end.
Click to expand...
I think we should do both :thumbs:

Ps. I'll join the space exploration one, I'm pretty sure I won't come across a poo of mine that floated up from the ocean :p
 
Phil V said:
Which is the equivalent of the dumb Facebook posts like 'we should stop paying foreign aid and pay nurses more'.

It's not either / or we should be doing both.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I think we should continue to pay foreign aid and help out those in need, and we should invest properly in our medical staff.
 
Anthony.Ralph said:
Could you define the terms "over-administrated" and "non-clinical management" please Ruth

Anthony.
Click to expand...

My apologies, I didn't think I'd worded it in a difficult manner.
I mean the sheer number of administrative non clinical roles within the average NHS trust.
 
viv1969 said:
My apologies, I didn't think I'd worded it in a difficult manner.
I mean the sheer number of administrative non clinical roles within the average NHS trust.
Click to expand...
I'm sure there's savings to be made, but after. Dozen 'reorganisations' we really ought to also revel in the fact that it's much more efficient than most healthcare systems, and when compared to the system in the States? It's ridiculously efficient compared to their privately run system.
 
viv1969 said:
"Dispatch war rocket Ajax.....to bring back his body........"
Click to expand...

You need to get out more.
Oh, hang on, one of my fave movies and soundtracks :)
 
They're so very different in every aspect though, that you can't make direct comparisons.
 
kendo1 said:
You need to get out more.
Oh, hang on, one of my fave movies and soundtracks :)
Click to expand...

I'm a hermit.
Anyone who knows me will confirm that :D
 
viv1969 said:
I'm a hermit.
Anyone who knows me will confirm that :D
Click to expand...
I don't belief that, you seem quite sociable to me at at the meets.
 
dejongj said:
I think we should do both (y)
Click to expand...
I agree, I don't think we should restrict science to things that have immediate practical applications - often those come indirectly through work needed to create the instruments leading to advances in manufacturing, or even more tangentially than that. The obvious example of this is that hypertext transfer protocol was after all created by a researcher at a particle accelerator facility, so people smashing atoms together had a convenient way to access shared data.
 
F1 is a prime example of advancement in technology, all because we want to travel faster, and do it safer. Take ABS, standard on almost every car now, came from F1. Its pros and cons regardless of exploration or advancement. It costs huge sums of money, but doesn't always lead to instant gratification.
 
Sarg0r said:
F1 is a prime example of advancement in technology, all because we want to travel faster, and do it safer. Take ABS, standard on almost every car now, came from F1. Its pros and cons regardless of exploration or advancement. It costs huge sums of money, but doesn't always lead to instant gratification.
Click to expand...

F1 cars don't have ABS.
 
Sarg0r said:
F1 is a prime example of advancement in technology, all because we want to travel faster, and do it safer. Take ABS, standard on almost every car now, came from F1. Its pros and cons regardless of exploration or advancement. It costs huge sums of money, but doesn't always lead to instant gratification.
Click to expand...

Apparently Not :-)

KitsuneAndy said:
I thought that ABS originally came from planes?
Click to expand...

I had a search.
I thought I'd be bored.....but I was wrong! :-)

https://www.hagerty.com/articles-videos/articles/2013/04/09/antilock-brakes
 
viv1969 said:
I thought I'd be bored.....but I was wrong! :)
Click to expand...
Interesting read, I was always under the impression that Jaguar were first with the E-Type, obviously not :)
 
LandRover have always had ABS (unless you've got thighs like a P&M Panther rider...) :P

IIRC the C Type was the first reliable application of disk brakes on racing cars.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top