On 7 Feb 2023 09:54:21 GMT
greymaus <greymaus@gmail.com> wrote:

> When I was young, we had no electricity, no running water, no central
> heating, no mobile phones, or land line phones at all, (telegraph five
> miles away) and we survived.

There are nearly three times as many people in the world now. A
surprisingly large proportion of whom have all of these things - progress
is wonderful.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On 7 Feb 2023 09:54:21 GMT, greymaus <greymaus@gmail.com> wrote:
> Solar Power only works when the sun shines.

Well conventional PV certainly.

I think there has been some work in harvesting the differential
in temperature between the panel and ambient air to continue
generating power. Although I am not sure that will work everywhere.

CSP (Concentrated Solar Power) as the input to a thermal energy
storage solution (either salt or sand) can provide electricity
overnight (and indeed over a long winter in Finland).

--
Andy Leighton => andyl@azaal.plus.com
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
- Douglas Adams

On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 11:13:25 +0000
Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> wrote:

> On 7 Feb 2023 09:54:21 GMT, greymaus <greymaus@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Solar Power only works when the sun shines.
>
> Well conventional PV certainly.
>
> I think there has been some work in harvesting the differential
> in temperature between the panel and ambient air to continue
> generating power. Although I am not sure that will work everywhere.

Probably not for long, there can't be much energy stored in the
thermal mass of the panel.

> CSP (Concentrated Solar Power) as the input to a thermal energy

The problem with CSP is that it needs a clear sky, diffuse sunlight
gets nowhere.

> storage solution (either salt or sand) can provide electricity
> overnight (and indeed over a long winter in Finland).

Batteries also work - modern roadworks lights come with batteries
and a solar panel instead of a diesel generator.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On Mon, 06 Feb 2023 20:46:31 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
>D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 13:20:47 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
>><steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>>On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 12:00:31 +0000
>>>Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 03/02/2023 19:41, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>> > In Norway it is 80%. It is cold up there, by the way.
>>>>
>>>> Norway has loads of hydro electric power. Up there they really are
>>>
>>> They have great geography for it.
>>>
>>>> cutting carbon, unlike a lot of the world where the batteries are
>>>> charged by fossil fuels.
>>>
>>> Wind does a lot of it these days too, but to stop using fossil fuels
>>>we need one or more of:
>>>
>>>* A 90% population reduction
>>> - No volunteers among those in favour it seems.
>>>* A lot of nuclear power plants
>>> - NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY ad so infinitum.
>>>* An enormous amount of energy storage (flow batteries perhaps)
>>> - Appears to be in progress *slowly* (which is unsurprising).
>>>* Something new
>>> - We might get lucky.
>>
>>Or something like Shipstones, mentioned in various books by RAH.
>
>Waiting for "something like Shipstones" would be pretty foolish.

Most 'scientific breakthroughs' are seen as impossible, until they
happen.
--
Jim

On 2023-02-07, D.J <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Feb 2023 20:46:31 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
> wrote:
>>D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>
>>>Or something like Shipstones, mentioned in various books by RAH.
>>
>>Waiting for "something like Shipstones" would be pretty foolish.
>
> Most 'scientific breakthroughs' are seen as impossible, until they
>

nd a hell of a lot fail after they cost a _lot_ of money.
I looked at that film, "Don't look up". I thought that bruce Willis solved that
problem some years ago?

Some Federal outfit discovers something that they think will kill everyone on
Earth, unless gazillions of dollars are spent to stop it?. Give me a break!.
The chicken little story of the sky falling unless they all run into
the henhous is shorter.

One bad thing about the Covid scam is that it makes young people think that
all health efforts are scams too. I see more young people smoking (bad idea)
and many children have not been given genuine vaccines (another bad idea).

--
greymausg@mail.com
where is our money gone, Dude?

On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 10:04:23 -0600
D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:

> Most 'scientific breakthroughs' are seen as impossible, until they
> happen.

This is true, however this does not help determine *which*
conceivable 'scientific breakthroughs' are actually possible and which are
just wishful thinking.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:

> On Mon, 06 Feb 2023 20:46:31 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
> wrote:
>>D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 13:20:47 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
>>><steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>>>On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 12:00:31 +0000
>>>>Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 03/02/2023 19:41, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>>> > In Norway it is 80%. It is cold up there, by the way.
>>>>>
>>>>> Norway has loads of hydro electric power. Up there they really are
>>>>
>>>> They have great geography for it.
>>>>
>>>>> cutting carbon, unlike a lot of the world where the batteries are
>>>>> charged by fossil fuels.
>>>>
>>>> Wind does a lot of it these days too, but to stop using fossil fuels
>>>>we need one or more of:
>>>>
>>>>* A 90% population reduction
>>>> - No volunteers among those in favour it seems.
>>>>* A lot of nuclear power plants
>>>> - NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY ad so infinitum.
>>>>* An enormous amount of energy storage (flow batteries perhaps)
>>>> - Appears to be in progress *slowly* (which is unsurprising).
>>>>* Something new
>>>> - We might get lucky.
>>>
>>>Or something like Shipstones, mentioned in various books by RAH.
>>
>>Waiting for "something like Shipstones" would be pretty foolish.
>
> Most 'scientific breakthroughs' are seen as impossible, until they
> happen.

I'm sure you have a study to support this ridiculous assertion.

Oh well, a couple of idiots seem to agree with you, you must be right...

--
Dan Espen

On 2023-02-07, greymaus <greymaus@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2023-02-07, D.J <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2023 20:46:31 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>> wrote:
>>
>>> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Or something like Shipstones, mentioned in various books by RAH.
>>>
>>> Waiting for "something like Shipstones" would be pretty foolish.
>>
>> Most 'scientific breakthroughs' are seen as impossible, until they
>> happen.

At which time they're seen as obvious.

The three stages of an idea:
1. It won't work.
2. It's impractical.
3. I knew it was a good idea all along.

> And a hell of a lot fail after they cost a _lot_ of money.
> I looked at that film, "Don't look up". I thought that bruce Willis
> solved that problem some years ago?

:-) At least he went through with it rather than selling out the planet.

> Some Federal outfit discovers something that they think will kill everyone on
> Earth, unless gazillions of dollars are spent to stop it?. Give me a break!.
> The chicken little story of the sky falling unless they all run into
> the henhous is shorter.

I saw it as more of an allegory, rather than something that would literally
come true. It certainly gave opportunities to poke fun at a lot of things
which, to quote Robin Williams in _Good Morning Vietnam_, are "screaming out
to be made fun of."

> One bad thing about the Covid scam is that it makes young people think that
> all health efforts are scams too. I see more young people smoking (bad idea)
> and many children have not been given genuine vaccines (another bad idea).

That's an inevitable result of the interaction between con artists
and suckers.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

On Tue, 7 Feb 2023 17:14:31 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
<steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 10:04:23 -0600
>D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
>
>> Most 'scientific breakthroughs' are seen as impossible, until they
>> happen.
>
> This is true, however this does not help determine *which*
>conceivable 'scientific breakthroughs' are actually possible and which are
>just wishful thinking.

I realize that, I have a science education.

But things many millions of people use everyday, were thought to be
impossible before 1955.
--
Jim

On 7 Feb 2023 17:35:56 GMT, greymaus <greymaus@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 2023-02-07, D.J <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2023 20:46:31 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>> wrote:
>>>D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>Or something like Shipstones, mentioned in various books by RAH.
>>>
>>>Waiting for "something like Shipstones" would be pretty foolish.
>>
>> Most 'scientific breakthroughs' are seen as impossible, until they
>>
>
>nd a hell of a lot fail after they cost a _lot_ of money.
>I looked at that film, "Don't look up". I thought that bruce Willis solved that
>problem some years ago?

There is more than one asteroid in our solar system.

>Some Federal outfit discovers something that they think will kill everyone on
>Earth, unless gazillions of dollars are spent to stop it?. Give me a break!.
>The chicken little story of the sky falling unless they all run into
>the henhous is shorter.
>
>One bad thing about the Covid scam is that it makes young people think that
>all health efforts are scams too. I see more young people smoking (bad idea)
>and many children have not been given genuine vaccines (another bad idea).

Millions of peple have died to not getting the vaccine. No scam aobut
it.
--
Jim

On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 19:45:05 GMT, Charlie Gibbs
<cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>On 2023-02-07, greymaus <greymaus@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2023-02-07, D.J <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2023 20:46:31 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Or something like Shipstones, mentioned in various books by RAH.
>>>>
>>>> Waiting for "something like Shipstones" would be pretty foolish.
>>>
>>> Most 'scientific breakthroughs' are seen as impossible, until they
>>> happen.
>
>At which time they're seen as obvious.
>
>The three stages of an idea:
> 1. It won't work.
> 2. It's impractical.
> 3. I knew it was a good idea all along.
>
>> And a hell of a lot fail after they cost a _lot_ of money.
>> I looked at that film, "Don't look up". I thought that bruce Willis
>> solved that problem some years ago?
>
>:-) At least he went through with it rather than selling out the planet.
>
>> Some Federal outfit discovers something that they think will kill everyone on
>> Earth, unless gazillions of dollars are spent to stop it?. Give me a break!.
>> The chicken little story of the sky falling unless they all run into
>> the henhous is shorter.
>
>I saw it as more of an allegory, rather than something that would literally
>come true. It certainly gave opportunities to poke fun at a lot of things
>which, to quote Robin Williams in _Good Morning Vietnam_, are "screaming out
>to be made fun of."

There are more than sufficiant numbers of asteroid made holes in our
planet to prove they 1) do happen, and there are enough large mountain
size and larger rocks out there, to prove it can happen again and
again.

>> One bad thing about the Covid scam is that it makes young people think that
>> all health efforts are scams too. I see more young people smoking (bad idea)
>> and many children have not been given genuine vaccines (another bad idea).
>
>That's an inevitable result of the interaction between con artists
>and suckers.

Yup, those con artistats who pretend a planet wide pandemic isn't
happening.
--
Jim

On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 14:11:46 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
wrote:
>D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>
>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2023 20:46:31 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>> wrote:
>>>D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>>On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 13:20:47 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
>>>><steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>>>>On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 12:00:31 +0000
>>>>>Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 03/02/2023 19:41, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>>>> > In Norway it is 80%. It is cold up there, by the way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Norway has loads of hydro electric power. Up there they really are
>>>>>
>>>>> They have great geography for it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> cutting carbon, unlike a lot of the world where the batteries are
>>>>>> charged by fossil fuels.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wind does a lot of it these days too, but to stop using fossil fuels
>>>>>we need one or more of:
>>>>>
>>>>>* A 90% population reduction
>>>>> - No volunteers among those in favour it seems.
>>>>>* A lot of nuclear power plants
>>>>> - NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY ad so infinitum.
>>>>>* An enormous amount of energy storage (flow batteries perhaps)
>>>>> - Appears to be in progress *slowly* (which is unsurprising).
>>>>>* Something new
>>>>> - We might get lucky.
>>>>
>>>>Or something like Shipstones, mentioned in various books by RAH.
>>>
>>>Waiting for "something like Shipstones" would be pretty foolish.
>>
>> Most 'scientific breakthroughs' are seen as impossible, until they
>> happen.
>
>I'm sure you have a study to support this ridiculous assertion.

Nothing rediculous about it.

>Oh well, a couple of idiots seem to agree with you, you must be right...

Cell phones were thought to be impossible, until they were invented
and made. Cars shouldn't go over 25 miles per hour as the wind would
suck the air out of your lungs and you would die, proven wrong. My
mother had an encyclopedia when she was a kid, it claimed it would
nver be possible to go to the moon. Why ? Because they used 60 miles
per hour steam locomotives as the means to get there. We;ve been to
Earth's moon, locomotives weren't used for the flight.

I didn't even have to do a web search.
--
Jim

D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 19:45:05 GMT, Charlie Gibbs
><cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

>>
>>I saw it as more of an allegory, rather than something that would literally
>>come true. It certainly gave opportunities to poke fun at a lot of things
>>which, to quote Robin Williams in _Good Morning Vietnam_, are "screaming out
>>to be made fun of."
>
>There are more than sufficiant numbers of asteroid made holes in our
>planet to prove they 1) do happen, and there are enough large mountain
>size and larger rocks out there, to prove it can happen again and
>again.

If you haven't watched _Don't Look Up_, you should. It is only
superficially about and "asteroid", actually it is an allegorical tale.

D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 14:11:46 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2023 20:46:31 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>> wrote:
>>>>D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>>>On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 13:20:47 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
>>>>><steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>>>>>On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 12:00:31 +0000
>>>>>>Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 03/02/2023 19:41, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>>>>> > In Norway it is 80%. It is cold up there, by the way.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Norway has loads of hydro electric power. Up there they really are
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They have great geography for it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> cutting carbon, unlike a lot of the world where the batteries are
>>>>>>> charged by fossil fuels.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wind does a lot of it these days too, but to stop using fossil fuels
>>>>>>we need one or more of:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>* A 90% population reduction
>>>>>> - No volunteers among those in favour it seems.
>>>>>>* A lot of nuclear power plants
>>>>>> - NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY ad so infinitum.
>>>>>>* An enormous amount of energy storage (flow batteries perhaps)
>>>>>> - Appears to be in progress *slowly* (which is unsurprising).
>>>>>>* Something new
>>>>>> - We might get lucky.
>>>>>
>>>>>Or something like Shipstones, mentioned in various books by RAH.
>>>>
>>>>Waiting for "something like Shipstones" would be pretty foolish.
>>>
>>> Most 'scientific breakthroughs' are seen as impossible, until they
>>> happen.
>>
>>I'm sure you have a study to support this ridiculous assertion.
>
>Nothing rediculous about it.

Perhaps not rediculous, but certainly ridiculous.

>
>>Oh well, a couple of idiots seem to agree with you, you must be right...
>
>Cell phones were thought to be impossible, until they were invented
>and made.

No, they weren't "thought to be impossible", just an extension of
existing portable radio technology.

>Cars shouldn't go over 25 miles per hour as the wind would
>suck the air out of your lungs and you would die, proven wrong. My
>mother had an encyclopedia when she was a kid, it claimed it would
>nver be possible to go to the moon. Why ? Because they used 60 miles
>per hour steam locomotives as the means to get there. We;ve been to
>Earth's moon, locomotives weren't used for the flight.

Even when such statements were made, they were made by small
numbers of ignorant individuals. They were never universally
accepted "truths".

None if this has any bearing on the fictional technology behind
Heinlein's Shipstones.

On 2023-02-07, D.J <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 19:45:05 GMT, Charlie Gibbs
><cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>On 2023-02-07, greymaus <greymaus@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-02-07, D.J <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2023 20:46:31 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Or something like Shipstones, mentioned in various books by RAH.
>>>>>
>>>>> Waiting for "something like Shipstones" would be pretty foolish.
>>>>
>>>> Most 'scientific breakthroughs' are seen as impossible, until they
>>>> happen.
>>
>>At which time they're seen as obvious.
>>
>>The three stages of an idea:
>> 1. It won't work.
>> 2. It's impractical.
>> 3. I knew it was a good idea all along.
>>
>>> And a hell of a lot fail after they cost a _lot_ of money.
>>> I looked at that film, "Don't look up". I thought that bruce Willis
>>> solved that problem some years ago?
>>
>>:-) At least he went through with it rather than selling out the planet.
>>
>>> Some Federal outfit discovers something that they think will kill everyone on
>>> Earth, unless gazillions of dollars are spent to stop it?. Give me a break!.
>>> The chicken little story of the sky falling unless they all run into
>>> the henhous is shorter.
>>
>>I saw it as more of an allegory, rather than something that would literally
>>come true. It certainly gave opportunities to poke fun at a lot of things
>>which, to quote Robin Williams in _Good Morning Vietnam_, are "screaming out
>>to be made fun of."
>
> There are more than sufficiant numbers of asteroid made holes in our
> planet to prove they 1) do happen, and there are enough large mountain
> size and larger rocks out there, to prove it can happen again and
> again.
>
>>> One bad thing about the Covid scam is that it makes young people think that
>>> all health efforts are scams too. I see more young people smoking (bad idea)
>>> and many children have not been given genuine vaccines (another bad idea).
>>
>>That's an inevitable result of the interaction between con artists
>>and suckers.
>
> Yup, those con artistats who pretend a planet wide pandemic isn't
> happening.

Millions have died, choking in their own blood, massives amount of
healthcare uniforms were a part of the con, Hospitals jammed with panicking
victims who choked and died in the corridors.. NOT.

I read a repert about the real 1918 flu. One week, in a local graveyard,
they were so behind in burials that all available roofed-in areas were filled
unburied coffins. By the end of the next week, it was over. I remember a
vairly severe flu about 1756 or so. Dw Pombal, the person in charge of Lisbon
after the earthquake, persisted in cremating bodies after that earthquake,
in spite of the church telling him he would be sent to Hell.

He avoided an epidemic.

--
greymausg@mail.com
where is our money gone, Dude?

On 2023-02-07, D.J <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 14:11:46 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>
>
>>Oh well, a couple of idiots seem to agree with you, you must be right...
>
> Cell phones were thought to be impossible, until they were invented
> and made.

Interesting point there. A sort of mobile phone was in use even before WWII,
I knew a man who worked at the problem of using mobile phone in cars
for a police force in another country. The delay in picking up the
next station by contact made them impractical until fairly recently,
which is why they were not usable in Airplanes at the time.

Cars shouldn't go over 25 miles per hour as the wind would
> suck the air out of your lungs and you would die, proven wrong.

t That was trains. It had an effect here, as when one of first
car races was planned, the rule in England that a man with a flag
precede each car was in operation, so the Gordon Bennett race
had to take place here.

>

Space flight to the moon. Was in one of J.Vernes books, giant
gun fires a shell with people in it to the moon, and somehow,
it still has enough jizz to return to earth. Verne was usually
plauible, but the g-forces to send a shell to the moon would
kill everyone inside.

Enclopedia salesmen were a pest in the late 40's. People bought
tem, put them on shelves, and never consulted them.

>
> I didn't even have to do a web search.

A tip about web searches. Ignore the first pages of results.

--
greymausg@mail.com
where is our money gone, Dude?

On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 21:03:02 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
>D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 19:45:05 GMT, Charlie Gibbs
>><cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>I saw it as more of an allegory, rather than something that would literally
>>>come true. It certainly gave opportunities to poke fun at a lot of things
>>>which, to quote Robin Williams in _Good Morning Vietnam_, are "screaming out
>>>to be made fun of."
>>
>>There are more than sufficiant numbers of asteroid made holes in our
>>planet to prove they 1) do happen, and there are enough large mountain
>>size and larger rocks out there, to prove it can happen again and
>>again.
>
>If you haven't watched _Don't Look Up_, you should. It is only
>superficially about and "asteroid", actually it is an allegorical tale.

No longer showing in my area, but I do realize it is about people who
pretends facts aren't.
--
Jim

On 7 Feb 2023 21:25:44 GMT, greymaus <greymaus@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 2023-02-07, D.J <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 14:11:46 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>
>>
>>>Oh well, a couple of idiots seem to agree with you, you must be right...
>>
>> Cell phones were thought to be impossible, until they were invented
>> and made.
>
>Interesting point there. A sort of mobile phone was in use even before WWII,
>I knew a man who worked at the problem of using mobile phone in cars
>for a police force in another country. The delay in picking up the
>next station by contact made them impractical until fairly recently,
>which is why they were not usable in Airplanes at the time.

My grandfather and i watched a news program in the early 1950s. The
point was a scientist or two would be asked questions about technology
portrayed in newspapers.

Dick Tracey comic in the newspaper showed wrist communicators. The
scientists said it was fiction and they wetre impossible.

Turns out they aren't impossible.

>Cars shouldn't go over 25 miles per hour as the wind would
>> suck the air out of your lungs and you would die, proven wrong.
>
>t That was trains. It had an effect here, as when one of first
>car races was planned, the rule in England that a man with a flag
>precede each car was in operation, so the Gordon Bennett race
>had to take place here.

Shiloh Military Park still had such a law on the book in the 1970s.
Some people refused to leave the park, it closed at sunset, so the
Park rangers gave them a ticket for not obeying one of the laws there.
A flag bearer must proceed all motor vehicles across the one lane
bridge in the possible case that a horse and buggy is coming the other
way.

>Space flight to the moon. Was in one of J.Vernes books, giant
>gun fires a shell with people in it to the moon, and somehow,
>it still has enough jizz to return to earth. Verne was usually
>plauible, but the g-forces to send a shell to the moon would
>kill everyone inside.

It was considered fictional until the Apollo astronauts went.
Scientists were claiming it wasn't possible in the 1950s. Then the
Soviets put Gagarin up, then everyone started complaining about why
didn't the US have astronauts up in orbit ?

>Enclopedia salesmen were a pest in the late 40's. People bought
>tem, put them on shelves, and never consulted them.

Articles in them are typically out of date.

>> I didn't even have to do a web search.
>
>A tip about web searches. Ignore the first pages of results.

It varies.
--
Jim

On 7 Feb 2023 21:07:42 GMT, greymaus <greymaus@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 2023-02-07, D.J <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 19:45:05 GMT, Charlie Gibbs
>><cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>On 2023-02-07, greymaus <greymaus@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2023-02-07, D.J <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2023 20:46:31 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Or something like Shipstones, mentioned in various books by RAH.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Waiting for "something like Shipstones" would be pretty foolish.
>>>>>
>>>>> Most 'scientific breakthroughs' are seen as impossible, until they
>>>>> happen.
>>>
>>>At which time they're seen as obvious.
>>>
>>>The three stages of an idea:
>>> 1. It won't work.
>>> 2. It's impractical.
>>> 3. I knew it was a good idea all along.
>>>
>>>> And a hell of a lot fail after they cost a _lot_ of money.
>>>> I looked at that film, "Don't look up". I thought that bruce Willis
>>>> solved that problem some years ago?
>>>
>>>:-) At least he went through with it rather than selling out the planet.
>>>
>>>> Some Federal outfit discovers something that they think will kill everyone on
>>>> Earth, unless gazillions of dollars are spent to stop it?. Give me a break!.
>>>> The chicken little story of the sky falling unless they all run into
>>>> the henhous is shorter.
>>>
>>>I saw it as more of an allegory, rather than something that would literally
>>>come true. It certainly gave opportunities to poke fun at a lot of things
>>>which, to quote Robin Williams in _Good Morning Vietnam_, are "screaming out
>>>to be made fun of."
>>
>> There are more than sufficiant numbers of asteroid made holes in our
>> planet to prove they 1) do happen, and there are enough large mountain
>> size and larger rocks out there, to prove it can happen again and
>> again.
>>
>>>> One bad thing about the Covid scam is that it makes young people think that
>>>> all health efforts are scams too. I see more young people smoking (bad idea)
>>>> and many children have not been given genuine vaccines (another bad idea).
>>>
>>>That's an inevitable result of the interaction between con artists
>>>and suckers.
>>
>> Yup, those con artistats who pretend a planet wide pandemic isn't
>> happening.
>
>Millions have died, choking in their own blood, massives amount of
>healthcare uniforms were a part of the con, Hospitals jammed with panicking
>victims who choked and died in the corridors.. NOT.

Covid isn't a con. It killed millions of people who refused to get
vaccinated after they watched some fool on youtube claim they didn't
need the vaccination.

>I read a repert about the real 1918 flu. One week, in a local graveyard,
>they were so behind in burials that all available roofed-in areas were filled
>unburied coffins. By the end of the next week, it was over. I remember a
>vairly severe flu about 1756 or so. Dw Pombal, the person in charge of Lisbon
>after the earthquake, persisted in cremating bodies after that earthquake,
>in spite of the church telling him he would be sent to Hell.
>
>He avoided an epidemic.

People who didn't wear masks in the US during the 1918 flu pandemic,
were arrested and jailed. Same thing should have happened to the
people who even refused, I hear them first hand, to wash their hands.
--
Jim

D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 21:03:02 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>wrote:
>>D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 19:45:05 GMT, Charlie Gibbs
>>><cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>I saw it as more of an allegory, rather than something that would literally
>>>>come true. It certainly gave opportunities to poke fun at a lot of things
>>>>which, to quote Robin Williams in _Good Morning Vietnam_, are "screaming out
>>>>to be made fun of."
>>>
>>>There are more than sufficiant numbers of asteroid made holes in our
>>>planet to prove they 1) do happen, and there are enough large mountain
>>>size and larger rocks out there, to prove it can happen again and
>>>again.
>>
>>If you haven't watched _Don't Look Up_, you should. It is only
>>superficially about and "asteroid", actually it is an allegorical tale.
>
>No longer showing in my area, but I do realize it is about people who
>pretends facts aren't.

I don't believe it was ever in theaters, or if it was, it was very
limited release. It is a Netflix production and is still available
thereupon.

D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Feb 2023 20:46:31 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
> wrote:
>> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>> On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 13:20:47 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
>>> <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 12:00:31 +0000
>>>> Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 03/02/2023 19:41, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>>>> In Norway it is 80%. It is cold up there, by the way.
>>>>>
>>>>> Norway has loads of hydro electric power. Up there they really are
>>>>
>>>> They have great geography for it.
>>>>
>>>>> cutting carbon, unlike a lot of the world where the batteries are
>>>>> charged by fossil fuels.
>>>>
>>>> Wind does a lot of it these days too, but to stop using fossil fuels
>>>> we need one or more of:
>>>>
>>>> * A 90% population reduction
>>>> - No volunteers among those in favour it seems.
>>>> * A lot of nuclear power plants
>>>> - NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY ad so infinitum.
>>>> * An enormous amount of energy storage (flow batteries perhaps)
>>>> - Appears to be in progress *slowly* (which is unsurprising).
>>>> * Something new
>>>> - We might get lucky.
>>>
>>> Or something like Shipstones, mentioned in various books by RAH.
>>
>> Waiting for "something like Shipstones" would be pretty foolish.
>
> Most 'scientific breakthroughs' are seen as impossible, until they
> happen.

ZPE

--
Pete

D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Feb 2023 17:14:31 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
> <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 10:04:23 -0600
>> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Most 'scientific breakthroughs' are seen as impossible, until they
>>> happen.
>>
>> This is true, however this does not help determine *which*
>> conceivable 'scientific breakthroughs' are actually possible and which are
>> just wishful thinking.
>
> I realize that, I have a science education.
>
> But things many millions of people use everyday, were thought to be
> impossible before 1955.

The transistor was the breakthrough. Everything since has just been
refinement.

--
Pete

Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>
>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2023 20:46:31 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>> wrote:
>>> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>> On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 13:20:47 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
>>>> <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 12:00:31 +0000
>>>>> Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 03/02/2023 19:41, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>>>>> In Norway it is 80%. It is cold up there, by the way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Norway has loads of hydro electric power. Up there they really are
>>>>>
>>>>> They have great geography for it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> cutting carbon, unlike a lot of the world where the batteries are
>>>>>> charged by fossil fuels.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wind does a lot of it these days too, but to stop using fossil fuels
>>>>> we need one or more of:
>>>>>
>>>>> * A 90% population reduction
>>>>> - No volunteers among those in favour it seems.
>>>>> * A lot of nuclear power plants
>>>>> - NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY ad so infinitum.
>>>>> * An enormous amount of energy storage (flow batteries perhaps)
>>>>> - Appears to be in progress *slowly* (which is unsurprising).
>>>>> * Something new
>>>>> - We might get lucky.
>>>>
>>>> Or something like Shipstones, mentioned in various books by RAH.
>>>
>>> Waiting for "something like Shipstones" would be pretty foolish.
>>
>> Most 'scientific breakthroughs' are seen as impossible, until they
>> happen.
>
> I'm sure you have a study to support this ridiculous assertion.
>
> Oh well, a couple of idiots seem to agree with you, you must be right...
>

That’s why it’s a “breakthrough” instead of a simple matter of engineering.
Most, however, don’t seem to come about as a result of huge government
programs, but from one “mad scientist” in a lab. Government gave us the
Manhattan Project and the Apollo Program - both worthy, but neither was
breakthrough science

--
Pete

D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
> On 7 Feb 2023 21:25:44 GMT, greymaus <greymaus@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2023-02-07, D.J <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 07 Feb 2023 14:11:46 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>
>>>> Oh well, a couple of idiots seem to agree with you, you must be right...
>>>
>>> Cell phones were thought to be impossible, until they were invented
>>> and made.
>>
>> Interesting point there. A sort of mobile phone was in use even before WWII,
>> I knew a man who worked at the problem of using mobile phone in cars
>> for a police force in another country. The delay in picking up the
>> next station by contact made them impractical until fairly recently,
>> which is why they were not usable in Airplanes at the time.
>
> My grandfather and i watched a news program in the early 1950s. The
> point was a scientist or two would be asked questions about technology
> portrayed in newspapers.
>
> Dick Tracey comic in the newspaper showed wrist communicators. The
> scientists said it was fiction and they wetre impossible.
>
> Turns out they aren't impossible.
>
>
>> Cars shouldn't go over 25 miles per hour as the wind would
>>> suck the air out of your lungs and you would die, proven wrong.
>>
>> t That was trains. It had an effect here, as when one of first
>> car races was planned, the rule in England that a man with a flag
>> precede each car was in operation, so the Gordon Bennett race
>> had to take place here.
>
> Shiloh Military Park still had such a law on the book in the 1970s.
> Some people refused to leave the park, it closed at sunset, so the
> Park rangers gave them a ticket for not obeying one of the laws there.
> A flag bearer must proceed all motor vehicles across the one lane
> bridge in the possible case that a horse and buggy is coming the other
> way.
>
>> Space flight to the moon. Was in one of J.Vernes books, giant
>> gun fires a shell with people in it to the moon, and somehow,
>> it still has enough jizz to return to earth. Verne was usually
>> plauible, but the g-forces to send a shell to the moon would
>> kill everyone inside.
>
> It was considered fictional until the Apollo astronauts went.
> Scientists were claiming it wasn't possible in the 1950s. Then the
> Soviets put Gagarin up, then everyone started complaining about why
> didn't the US have astronauts up in orbit ?
>
>> Enclopedia salesmen were a pest in the late 40's. People bought
>> tem, put them on shelves, and never consulted them.
>
> Articles in them are typically out of date.
>
>>> I didn't even have to do a web search.
>>
>> A tip about web searches. Ignore the first pages of results.
>
> It varies.

Cell phones, etc. were impossible until electronics got small enough to put
the required intelligence into them.

--
Pete

Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> writes:
> D.J. <chucktheouch@gmnol.com> writes:
>>
>> Most 'scientific breakthroughs' are seen as impossible, until they
>> happen.
>
> I'm sure you have a study to support this ridiculous assertion.
>
> Oh well, a couple of idiots seem to agree with you, you must be right...

Rather than ridiculous, I'd be inclined to regard this as almost
tautological. It's almost the very definition of a scientific
breakthrough.

There are exceptions, like everybody knows P != NP and when somebody
either proves it's true or proves it can't be proved we'll all say "at
last!", but not many.