• Launch Day is nearly upon us! Head over to this thread and share your thoughts before, during, and after Crew Dragon finally lifts off.

how to build spacecraft

Page 2 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
SJQ":2rntytm4 said:
Hi, ALP. I believe you are correct about Scotty's preference for Scotch (gee, ya think?) but you've forgotten his capacity. As I recall the script, he got to the brandy only after he finished the Scotch. And pretty much everything else he could extract from any other bottle he found.... So brandy may be for wussies, but if you're going around calling thirsty Scots "wussies", you are a braver - or dumber - man than I am. ;)
You know, now that I think about it, you're absolutely right! IIRC, they did start off with Saurian brandy though. Scotty only brought out his carefully guarded bottle of scotch when they had gone through the Suarian brandy and Romulan ale, IIRC.

..My understanding (I am not a linguist by any stretch of the imagination) is that English as a language is far more flexible than most if not all other languages. Something to do with its history as a bastard language, as far as heritage is concerned. My foreign associates worried about their speaking English correctly, and couldn't believe that you could "word-salad" a sentence to an extreme extent, and still convey at least some of the intended meaning to a person fluent in English. Although I concede that alphan sorta stretches that theory. And we're off topic again. Does it matter in this thread?

SJQ
English is a tremendously expressive language, quite likely due to your assertion. It easily incorporates new words and ideas, so effectively that "leet speak" even makes it into the English lexicon with little fuss. LOL WTF? ORLY? :) We English users are truly blessed as I don't believe any other language can be as expressive as ours or be understood so readily.

I'm not a linguist. But, I've read some articles on their opinions. One article on Chomsky has a good example of what some call Universal Grammar - "The cat is on the mat." makes sense to us, right? However, "Cat mat the on is." does not. While some of that is surely due simply to how we construct proper English, Chomsky was asserting that proper grammar, in every human society (with some exceptions noted) follows a very similar set of rules, regardless of the language being spoken. There is some intrinsic ability for human beings to construct thoughts and communicate them in an understandable way that is reflected in most languages. Further, that we can learn "new" words and phrases and use them with equal ability as the ones we have already heard and been taught lends credibility to this claim. Language is just an expression of human thought and there's a grammar that appears to be shared which seems to indicate that it's the shared, natural, capabilities of the human mind that are being reflected in language.

Consequently, language that closely follows this Universal Grammar will be easier to understand. Those languages that don't are much more difficult. English happens to be one that, according to some, naturally follows principles akin to an idea of Universal Grammar.
 
B

bmk1245

Guest
a_lost_packet_":3bijilfj said:
[...] If English is not your primary language, please use a translation program. Then, at least, some of what you write might have some sort of cohesive meaning to it.
[...]
If OP's primary language is Vonlenska (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vonlenska#Vonlenska), although simplified (separate words have meanings, at least), translation software wouldn't be much of the help.
 
P

pyoko

Guest
I have to say, although this is a rather more sober and scientific forum than most I have seen, the Unexplained section posts are really unexplained. Maybe it's because you keep just one cage for it. Like the OP... I am really wondering at the thought patterns one needs to have happening to write that.
 
S

SJQ

Guest
pyoko":11tzwsjt said:
I have to say, although this is a rather more sober and scientific forum than most I have seen, the Unexplained section posts are really unexplained. Maybe it's because you keep just one cage for it. Like the OP... I am really wondering at the thought patterns one needs to have happening to write that.
"Sober"? Perhaps you missed the gentleman above, the one in the red shirt....? :) Either James Doohan absolutely hated that photograph, with a passion, or he had an immense sense of humour.

But I think you're right about the one cage theory for our more lucid(?) participants. It keeps the paper-changing effort to a minimum. Oh, wait.... We used the plans for "how to build spacecraft" in the bottom of the cage....

Damn! And I was just itching to try out my shiny, new Canadian Tire* "fits-all" (= "adjustable") wrench. It's a metric fits-all - you turn the little spinny thingie** in the handle the other way to close the jaws. :eek:

SJQ


* For those of you who don't know, Canadian Tire is a large chain store here in The Great White North that allegedly is in the DIY automotive and hardware markets. They're not bad if you need to buy garbage bags.

** A highly technical engineering term.
 
Y

yevaud

Guest
^^^ You're going to fit in just fine around here ^^^

pyoko":22u0d5zr said:
...rather more sober...
The Greeks had a rule that you never make a decision sober that you hadn't first discussed while drunk; the Spartans had a rule that you never make a decision drunk that you hadn't first discussed while sober.

Or possibly it was the other way around.

...and I'll drink to that! ;)
 
A

alphan

Guest
You know what, it is going to be exactly how you envisioned it to be, we gonna be drinking whiskey (I have to say I prefer single malt, or even better some cask) chewing on cigars or what ever, playing with our wrenches and screwdrivers and building things that will last, what is more we will last.
We don't need any more data for a first test; we already do have a collection of sound, electrical activity and DNA sequence data that just needs to be gathered together. Why gather this data together and why do we need more data, particularly why every species on Earth? The answer to all these lies in symbiosis. Firstly, the symbiosis of life's frequencies (sound electric and DNA data might be mutually exclusive but when one considers that they are from the same organism, their relation and hence their correlation is inevitable), secondly the symbiosis of species; this is the hardest to understand since what lives very well together one place not only can't live in another place they can't be mixed with others from another place too. What is more they actually all live in the same place; Earth! Then we can even talk of symbiosis infinitely; of planets, of solar systems, of galaxies and even of universes.
The way ahead does demand the gathering of new data from the species and from Earth. We don't need a fancy microphone and one just has to record the sounds in the same type(same built perhaps) of instrument and the same goes for electrical data, there needs to be consistency of measurement for accuracy of cross referencing. We are looking through a microscope when we are looking at Earth for sound and electricity; the trick is we know what we are looking for and how to find it; a) as location; when we have the chourus of life as data we can look at the sound and electrical graphs of the Earth, taken at a point in time and locate the margins of such activity as Location, b)as algorithm; if we have a minutes of recording of millions of species each playing in a randomized loop that would give you the algorithm to see the flow of life in the Earth's data, hence Movement.

This is it for now, thank you...oh and,
Yaşasın standart sapma! Yaşasın babelfish!
 
M

Mee_n_Mac

Guest
alphan":1xcomp7n said:
Firstly, the symbiosis of life's frequencies (sound electric and DNA data might be mutually exclusive but when one considers that they are from the same organism, their relation and hence their correlation is inevitable) ...
Huh ? You think there's some "inevitable" correlation between somethings DNA and it's "electric" and it's "sound". The frequency of what exactly in somethings DNA ? I suspect Minnie Riperton's frequency (@56 secs) will differ quite a bit from that of Barry White (@ any time). But knock yourself out and have a ball doing whatever it is you are trying to talk about.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kE0pwJ5PMDg[/youtube]

Let me help you on your research.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCeD_6Y3GQc[/youtube]
 
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vu3r7ZVblz8[/youtube]
 
S

SJQ

Guest
In a moment (well, several moments; they are long posts) of temporary mental aberration ("masochism" is such a harsh word), I re-read alphan's missives (Gawd help me!). As a result of this effort, I have come to two conclusions:

1.
The first conclusion is WRT to information theory, and is tentative. As has been previously discussed in this thread, English is a very forgiving language in its capability to transfer information in the absence of syntax. While certain fundamentals must be observed, functional albeit incomplete/inaccurate transfer of information can occur even in the absence of a rigourously well-formed syntax. The operative phrase is "very forgiving"; it is not "totally forgiving".

Alphan's missives have conclusively demonstrated that information content transfer approaches null as syntax approaches zero, at speeds up to, and I suspect, including c. Oh, wait - wrong thread! My bad.... :oops:

I need to review Shannon, but one of two mutually-exclusive conditions may therefore apply:

a) Alphan has successfully distributed his information content across the entire channel bandwidth available, achieving maximum theoretical spectral efficiency. If this is so, then we are not re-constructing the received transmission correctly.

b) Sometimes, noise is just noise.....

2.
The second conclusion is WRT to the previously advanced cage theory, and is conclusively supported by the available data set. The error bars constraining the data points are sufficiently uniform to permit forming the cage with them.

In summary, the second conclusion is that it is time to change the paper in the bottom of the cage.


SJQ
 
A

alphan

Guest
[vimeo]10194689[/vimeo]
And tonight the music is coming from Replikas from İStanbul.
 
A

alphan

Guest
this is a good one!

an idea for a first test
I think I have found my data
If the gene sequence of Saccharomyces cerevisiae;
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...00095-0299.pdf
C CAA AGT GAA TGA TAT GGG GCT AGA AAC GTG TGT TAC TTT AGG TAT GGT TGA TCA AGA TCA AGC AAA GCA ATT GAA AGA TGC AGG 85
TTT GAC TGC ATA CAA CCA TAA CAT CGA CAC TTC CAG AGA ACA CTA TAG TAA GGT CAT CAC CAC GAG AAC CTA CGA CGA CAG GTT ACA GAC 175
CAT CAA GAA TGT CCA AGA ATC TGG AAT AAA AGC CTG TAC CGG TGG TAT TTT GGG TCT CGG TGA AAG CGA AGA CGA CCA TAT AGG ATT CAT 265
CTA CAC ATT ATC CAA TAT GTC TCC TCA TCC TGA GTC CCT ACC AAT TAA TAG ACT AGT TGC TAT CAA AGG GAC TCC AAT GGC TGA GGA ACT 355
TGC CGA TCC AAA GAG TAA AAA GTT GCA ATT CGA CGA AAT TTT GAG AAC CAT TGC CAC AGC GAG AAT AGT TAT GCC AAA GGC CAT TAT AAG 445
ACT TGC CGC TGG TCG TTA TAC AAT GAA AGA AAC AGA GCA ATT TGT CTG TTT CAT GGC AGG TTG TAA CAG TAT CTT CAC CGG TAA GAA AAT 535
GCT GAC GAC AAT ATA TAA CGG TTG GGA CGA AGA CAA GGC AAT GTT GGC TAA ATG GGG ATT GCA ACC TAT GGA GGC ATT TAA GTA CGA CAG 625
ATC TTG AAG ATA GGG ATA TGT GGA TAA TTC TAC GAT TCT AAC TGT ACA TTT CTC CCT TAT TTA TTA AGA AAA CCT aTA TAT ATA TA 715
(AT)7
TAC CTA TTT ATT CTG CCA TCG TTA GCT GGC GTT TTA TCT TTT ATG CAT CCA ATA TCT AAT ATT ACT TCC GAT CAC GCA TTT AGT TCT GAT 805
TAC AGC AGA AAT CGT AGC GCG ATG AGA CAT TTC ATC AAA TGG CCT TTT TTT TTT GGG CMA TTT TTT TAT ATC TTG AAA TGA TAG TTG CCT 895
TIO
TGT ACT TTC AAC CGT TCA TTT CAT TAA GAA CTT GAC TAA ATA TGA ACA TTT CTT .AAA AAA GGT TGA CAT ATA AAA ATA ATC GAA TAT 985
Ag
AAA CGA TGG AAT TTT TAT AAA ATT AAA CAC &TATATA T ACT ATA AAT ATG TCA AAG AAA CCA TAC AAT CAT AGA TTT ATA 1075
(AT)g
ACT ATC TTT TGG ATG ACA TTA ATG AAC ATA ACG CTC CTA ATA CAA ATG TCA AAA AAT ATT ACC CGC AAA TAC GAA TCT TTT TTT TTT CTC 1165
Tjo
GAT GAA ATT TTG CAA AGA GTT CGA AAT TTT TAT TTC AAG AGC TGG TAG AGA AAA TTT CAT AAG GTT TTC CTA CCG ATG CTT TTA TAA AAT 1255
Met Phe Ser Lou Pro Thr Lou Thr Ser Asp Ile Thr Va1 Glu Val Asn Ser Ser 18
CTT CGT TTT GTC TCA CAT ATA CCA ACA AGA GTA ACG ATG TTT TCT TTA CCT ACC CTA ACC TCA GAC ATC ACT GTT GAA GTC AAC AGT TCC 1345
Ala Thr Lys Thr Pro Ph. Val Arg Arg Pro Val Glu Pro Vol Gly Lys Phe Phe Lou Gln His Al. Gln Arg Thr Lou Arg Asn His Thr 48
GCT ACC AAA ACC CCA TTC GTC CGT CGT CCG GTC GAA CCG GTT GGT AAG TTC TTT TTG CMA CAT GCT CAA AGA ACT TTG AGA AAC CAC ACC 1435
Trp Ser Glu Phe Glu Arg Ii- Glu Ala Glu Lys Asn Val Lys Thr Val Asp Glu Ser Asn Va1 Asp Pro Asp Glu Lou Lou Ph. Asp Thr 78
TGG TCT GAA TTT GAA AGA ATT GAA GCT GAA AAG AAC GTC AAA ACC GTT GAT GAA TCC AAT GTC GAC CCA GAT GAG TTG TTA TTC GAC ACT 1525
3790
Zuotin, a putative Z-DNA binding protein in yeast
Glu Leu Ala Asp Glu Asp Leu Leu Thr Hi1 Asp Ala Arg Asp Trp Lys Thr Ala Asp Leu Tyr Ala Ala Met Gly Leu Ser Lys Leu Arg 108
GAA TTG GCC GAT GAA GAT TTA CTG ACT CAT GAT GCT AGA GAC TGG AAA ACT GCC GAT TTG TAT GCT GCT ATG GGT TTG TCT AAG TTG CGT 1615
Phe Arg Ala Thr Glu Ser Gln Ile Ile Lys Ala His Arg Lys Gln Val Val Lys Tyr His Pro Asp Lys Gln Ser Ala Ala Gly Gly Ser 138
TTC AGA GCT ACT GAA AGT CAA ATC ATC AAG GCT CAC AGA AAA CAA GTT GTC AAG TAC CAT CCA GAC AAG CAA TCT GCT GCT GGT GGT AGT 1705
Leu Asp Gln Asp Gly Phe Phe Lys Ile Ile Gln Lys Ala Phe Glu Thr Lou Thr Asp Ser Asn Lys Arg Ala Gln Tyr Asp Ser Cys Asp 168
TTG GAC CAA GAT GGC TTT TTC AAG ATT ATT CAA AAG GCC TTT GAA ACT TTG ACT GAT TCC AAC AAG AGA GCT CAG TAC GAC TCA TGT GAT 1795
Phe Val Ala Asp Val Pro Pro Pro Lys Lys Gly Thr Asp Tyr Asp Phe Tyr Glu Ala Trp Gly Pro Val Phe Glu Ala Glu Ala Arg Phe 198
TTT GTT GCC GAT GTT CCT CCT CCA AAG AAG GGT ACC GAT TAT GAC TTT TAT GAA GCT TGG GGC CCC GTT TTC GAA GCT GAA GCT CGT TTT 1885
Ser Lys Lys Thr Pro Ile Pro Ser Leu Gly Asn Lys Asp Ser Ser Lys Lys Glu Val Glu Gln Phe Tyr Ala Phe Trp His Arg Phe Asp 228
TCT AAG AAG ACT CCT ATT CCT TCT CTA GGT AAC AAA GAT TCT TCC AAG AAG GAA GTT GAA CAA TTC TAT GCT TTC TGG CAC AGA TTT GAC 1975
Ser Trp Arg Thr Phe Glu Phe Leu Asp Glu Asp Vol Pro Asp Asp Ser Ser Asn Arg Asp His Lys Arg Tyr Ile Glu Arg Lys Asn Lys 258
TCC TGG AGA ACC TTT GAG TTC TTG GAC GAA GAT GTC CCA GAT GAC TCT TCT AAC AGA GAC CAC AAG CGT TAC ATT GAA AGA AAG AAC AAG 2065
Ala Ala Arg Asp Lys Lys Lys Thr Ala Asp Asn Ala Arg Leu Val Lys Leu Val Glu Arg Ala Val Ser Glu Asp Pro Arg Ile Lys Met 288
GCC GCA AGA GAC AAG AAG AAG ACT GCT GAT AAC GCT AGA TTG GTC AAA CTT GTT GAA AGA GCT GTC AGT GAA GAT CCC CGT ATC AAA ATG 2155
Phe Lys Glu Glu Glu Lys Lys Glu Lys Glu Arg Arg Lys Trp Glu Arg Glu Ala Gly Ala Arg Ala Glu Ala Glu Ala Lys Ala Lys Ala 318
TTC AAA GAA GAA GAG AAG AAG GAA AAG GAA AGA AGA AAA TGG GAA AGA GAA GCC GGT GCC AGA GCT GAA GCT GAA GCT AAG GCC AAG GCC 2245
Homopurine tract (49)
Glu Ala Glu Ala Lys Ala Lys Ala Glu Ser Glu Ala Lys Ala Asn Ala Ser Ala Lys Ala Asp Lys Lys Lys Ala Lys Glu Ala Ala Lys 348
GAA GCT GAA GCG AAG GCT AAA GCT GAA TCT GAA GCC AAG GCT AAC GCC TCC GCA AAA GCT GAC AAA AAG AAG GCT AAG GAA GCT GCT AAG 2335
Ala Ala Lys Lys Lys Asn Lys Arg Ala Ile Arg Asn Ser Ala Lys Glu Ala Asp Tyr Phe Gly Asp Ala Asp Lys Ala Thr Thr Ile Asp 378
GCC GCC AAG AAA AAG AAC AAG AGA GCC ATC CGT AAC TCT GCT AAG GAA GCT GAC TAC TTT GGT GAT GCT GAC AAG GCC ACC ACG ATT GAC 2425
Glu Gln Val Gly Leu Ile Val Asp Ser Leu Asn Asp Glu Glu Leu Val Ser Thr Ala Asp Lys Ile Lys Ala Asn Ala Ala Gly Ala Lys 408
GAA CAA GTT GGT TTG ATC GTT GAC ACT TTG AAT GAC GAA GAG TTA GTG TCC ACC GCC GAT AAG ATC AAG GCC AAT GCT GCT GGT GCC AAG 2515
Glu Val Leu Lys Glu Ser Ala Lys Thr Ile Val Asp Ser Gly Lys Leu Pro Ser Ser Leu Leu Ser Tyr Phe Val TER 433
GAA GTT TTG AAG GAA TCT GCA AAG ACT ATT GTC GAT TCT GGC AAA CTA CCA TCC AGC TTG TTG TCC TAC TTC GTG TGA ATA CCG TAA GAA 2605
ATG GAA TAG AAT ATA TAC GAA TGT ATA CGA ATA TTA TAG AGA ACG TTC TCT TTT ATT TCT ATA ATG AAT AGG TTC GGG TAA CGG TTC CCT 2695
TTT TAG GTA TTT CTA GAA GAT GAG AGA AGA GGG AAT AAT GAG AAA GGC GAA AAA TAA AGA CAC CTT TAA CGA AAG ATC AAA GGT GTC CTT 2785
Poly (A)
ATT TAC TTA CAA TAG CTG CAA TTA GTA CGA CTC AAA AAA AGT GAA AAC AAA ACT GAA AGG ATA GAT CAA TGT CTT ACA GAG GAC CTA TTG 2875
GAA ATT TTG GCG GAT AGC CAA TGT CAT CAT CGC TTG GAC CAT ACT CTG GCG GTG CAC AAT TCC GAT CAA ACC AGA ACC AAT CCA CTT CTG 2965
GCA TCT TAA AGC AAT GGA AGC ATT CTT TTG AAA AGT TTG CCT CCA GAA TTG AGG GGC TCA CTG ACA ATG CAG TTG TTT ATA AAT TGA AGC 3055
CTT ACA TTC CAA GTT TGT CAA GAT TTT T 3083

İf just the above is equal to this;
sounds of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=3859762

Then what would we have as a code here?
;
http://spaceweather.com/glossary/inspire.html

Well that code would contain AI!
 
S

SJQ

Guest
Y'know, I'm seriously leaning towards Conclusion 1b of my previous post, "Sometimes, noise is just noise." With perhaps one slight modification - if an alphan post is involved, there's absolutely no "sometimes" about it.

Since it is not clear to me what the thread is actually about, I am reduced to guessing that the topic of this thread is "organic spacecraft". Otherwise, exactly what does a DNA transcript extract have to do with "how to build spacecraft"? To the very best of my (abused) comprehension, alphan has said absolutely nothing yet about actually building a spacecraft, by any means. And me with all these spiffy wrenches to play with.....

I know that the geneticists can do some really exotic things now, with the promise of even greater achievements to come, but somehow I don't think they will ever achieve anything that flies higher/faster than maybe a new and improved species of bird. Organic spacecraft? Lexx, perhaps, but that is and is likely to remain forever a notion solidly in the realm of Science Fiction, and I don't think alphan is anywhere near close to that discipline, either. At least, not good SF, such as Plan 9 From Outer Space, or Attack of the Killer Tomatoes, as two of the more stellar examples.... :roll: (These movies are so bad, they are exquisite! If the badness had been intentional, they would be legitimate works of genius.)

In short, it is extremely unlikely that anyone will ever grow a New Horizons probe in a vat of magic green sludge, nevermind NGC-1701. As far as is known, there is not much evolutionary potential in vacuum, if only because there aren't any species known to remain viable long enough under those conditions to reproduce asexually, much less by breeding the next generation through shuffling the genetic deck. Without an ancestral species, how does one evolve a ship species?

Given the length/duration of any voyages outward of the moon, the capability to grow/breed under vacuum conditions would be absolutely vital to an organic spacecraft, else how would repairs underway be accomplished? Welding patches onto a dermal layer is likely to cause the ship to twitch and flinch remarkably. The guy welding had better hang on tight....

SJQ
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts