Recent content by Ittiz

nothing. Although I suppose pretty much all inactive stellar mass black holes would be colder than the surrounding universe.

@Spencerpam Energy falling in. In fact if the progression of apparent time was pushed forward by the effect then the space increase would seem steady even if the actual mass increase wasn't. Although I think the expansion would actually be driven from the energy of background radiation...

You're right, theory was the wrong word, a hypothesis is what I meant. Then again many people say String theory (m-theory) also isn't a theory. In fact if you take that definition one step further the theory that exactly accurately describes everything also won't be a theory even if someone...

Based on the images and animations I've seen I'd say 500 meters to a kilometer in diameter. And yeah optimistic is a giant understatement. I actually think we won't know this stuff for sure until we start to actually experiment with rotating habitats in orbit. Something that hasn't gotten...

big, look at the gateway foundation's stuff

Could be, I came up with a theory we live in an infinitely dimensional multiverse and why we have three dimensions is because we've been compactified into and infinite series of black holes, each one compactifiing one dimension. Black holes in our universe would be compactifing 3d down to 2d...

I've thought of this before. What if everything with gravity and contracting at higher and higher speeds rather than empty space expanding? I haven't worked out the math but I'm pretty sure it would be indistinguishable from expansion.

There may be ways to reduce that issue though, darker colored satellites. If your satellites are dark on the earth facing side then the only thing you'll need to do is maybe expose a tiny amount longer as one passes in front of the object you're imaging.

Lol, Jason if you do that you won't have a girlfriend for long. I understand the perspective that moon and mars are very different. They are not the same. However if you compare it to exploring on earth, it's like testing out your stuff on a near by island before crossing the ocean with it...

No one really has "authority" on that and it will pretty much boil down to what people end up calling things. I think the name they use "Dwarf Planet" is pretty good at the moment. But then again I also think it's a planet, and the organization that gave it that name (The IAU) doesn't. I also...

They could have done a lot, in hind sight. Then again they couldn't have blow billions of more dollars on building a much smaller space station if they had done that now would they?

we could go to Venus today but getting there isn't the issue it's getting back. You can't get any resources from the surface and you need a rocket almost as powerful as a rocket on Earth to get back. Which means you need to bring everything with you! Seems difficult to me.

Hypergolics are dangerous. They tend to blow up all by themselves. The good thing about having people there, if they need to launch and they can't because their engines won't ignite they can troubleshoot the problem in person. Then if need be MacGyver a solution on the spot.

Says I don't have permission to do that. I suspect you need to be some minimum number of points to add media.

I agree and disagree. Yes the startup cost is high, or we'd probably already mostly be living in space by now. Time (and not much of it at this point) will overcome that. I'm much more skeptical about the "we can't live in low G" thing. Living in low G could shorten your life, or lengthen...