Glass half empty

My wife says I’m a glass half empty kinda guy while she prefers to see the glass half full.

To illustrate, someone recently asked me to answer to the question “What would our life be like after we move to a new planet?” to which I replied:

“Life would be alien in the sense that we cannot survive on another planet within reach (AKA our solar system) without never going out of doors and breathing the air. We’d be depressed because we’d never see the light of the sun and breathe the air.”

Although I’m convinced this is the correct view, my wife says I’m just like my father was – a pessimist. I admit to it proudly if not pessimistically.

How can you prove to me that life as we know it is in fact real?

We can’t prove it. We can always suspect it is something different than what we think is in fact real. This image might help illustrate our dilemma.

We could be just brains in a jar. However, calculations are that it would take more energy than presently exists in the entire universe to maintain such an illusion, so it’s likely that what we see is real and there is no “matrix” hiding from us.

Why don’t people try to invest little bit of time and do research for ‘Flat Earth’? How you can claim that its wrong if you haven’t investigated it?

What a weird question. It’s been “investigated” and proven wrong a gazillion ways, but you will not accept any of the ways, so what’s the point of you asking the question?

Why can’t we fly to the moon? NASA is telling lies that they lost technology, does it mean we actually can’t get to the moon?

No technology was lost.

Going to the moon is very expensive, very far away and has no value now that the cold war with the Soviet Union is over. We can’t even balance the budget and Trump wants to cut taxes. During the Kennedy era going to the moon was a competition as to which country had the best space exploration. That’s over sorta except for Mars. Probably the first country to set foot on Mars will be China.

Going to the moon wasn’t a hoax. You can see trails left by the lunar rovers and reflect lasers off the reflector left behind just for that purpose. We can’t hide anything, even from Wikileaks, what to speak of a faked lunar mission 9 times over. The biggest hoax is the hoax theory itself.

Since President Obama the focus has been to go to Mars, but the moon is not out of the picture. NASA intends to harvest rocks from a nearby asteroid with a robotic spaceship, and then orbit that spaceship around the moon. They then plan to have a manned mission to orbit the moon, rendezvous with that robotic satellite and bring some of those asteroid rocks back to Earth for examination.

In the meantime, we have satellites orbiting and mapping the moon in detail.


Can Mars become the ideal planet for humans in the future if no criminals, psychopaths, corrupters, religious, etc. individuals are allowed into Mars, only well educated and needed people (all have to go through tests and be observed)?

Essentially you’re asking if large numbers of people lived on Mars, could we make an ideal society. Succinctly put, no, because Mars can never be a livable planet for masses of people.

No atmosphere that would be heavy enough for us to breath could be held on Mars because the gravity of Mars is weak. This would mean a much thicker layer of atmosphere than Earth, yet because of the weak gravity, the atmosphere would simply blow away with solar winds. If anyone ever lived on Mars it would be in enclosed and small spaces capable of protecting the inhabitants from dangerous solar radiation.

Mars is a pipe dream. We may one day put footprints there, like on the moon, just so we can say we did. As far as terraforming is concerned, it isn’t going to be possible.

Our main interest in Mars these days is to discover if there was ever an ocean there (because we don’t really know for sure how our ocean got on Earth) and did it ever support microbial life.

NASA does not want to “infect” Mars with our germs in case it destroys previous native life. Thus no humans in mass numbers and no terraforming.

How would you respond if there was alien disclosure?

FTL, faster than light speed, is science fiction. It’s a convenience for making a great story. It is not possible to travel faster than the speed of light now or ever. You could, sometime in the distant future, reach a fraction of the speed of light, however, but even if you could achieve 1/10th the speed of light, a speed presently absolutely impossible, it would still take over a thousand years one way to reach the Trappist-1 system, a mere 40 light years away. This is because at 1/10th the speed of light it would take 400 years, but it would also take about 300 years to achieve that speed and another 300 years or so to slow down once you get there. These speeds are so incredibly fast. No propulsion system exists, and the fuel required would greatly weigh down the craft’s ability to both accelerate and slow down at the other end.

So I’d like to know why the aliens did it, and ask if they live that long or maybe they had what’s called a “generational spaceship,” or one where many hundreds of generations of people are born and die in the course of the journey. There would be so many question to ask.

It’s the main problem we have about ever leaving our solar system with a manned mission.


How important is relativity when applying it to faster than light travel?

How important is relativity when applying it to fast than light travel?

Your question should be reversed. The correct question is: How important is the speed of light when applying it to relativity? You see according to relativity as you approach the speed of light time changes, but you can’t exceed the speed of light. There is no faster than light travel.

I addressed a similar question in May when someone asked How young would I be if I stayed in space for 50 years? I replied you’d be the same age, but people on Earth would be much older when you got back.