Comments on: The Kline Directive: Technological Feasibility (2f) https://russian.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/11/the-kline-directive-technological-feasibility-2f Safeguarding Humanity Mon, 17 Apr 2017 05:27:29 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.6.1 By: Benjamin T. Solomon https://russian.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/11/the-kline-directive-technological-feasibility-2f#comment-157897 Fri, 14 Dec 2012 09:14:50 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=6259#comment-157897 Tom Kerwick, I stayed up most of the night of July 4 2012, watching CERN’s announcement that they had found the ‘Higgs’ boson, and was very disappointed when the said that for the layman they found ‘Higgs’ boson but for physicist the have to investigate some more.

What! What are they saying? Either they found it or they did not. My take is that have did not find the ‘Higgs’ boson, they found ‘a’ boson.

]]> By: Tom Kerwick https://russian.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/11/the-kline-directive-technological-feasibility-2f#comment-157829 Wed, 12 Dec 2012 10:19:26 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=6259#comment-157829 Benjamin — “Not good PR either.” — agreed. No greater example than at CERN where there was one safety explanation for the general public and a far far different one for the scientific community in the LSAG report. Before you could say ‘two mosquitoes’ many wannabe critics were discrediting the PR instead of the LSAG report — and it continues.

]]> By: Benjamin T. Solomon https://russian.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/11/the-kline-directive-technological-feasibility-2f#comment-157588 Wed, 05 Dec 2012 09:23:15 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=6259#comment-157588 Tom Kerwick, I’m just stating what Einstein was reported to have said. I’m not going to add or take away from that. Maybe modern theories require some additional requirements as you suggest, but I’ve shown that there are real problems with modern theories too.

Re the baking bread model sounds like the theoretical physics community has one version for the lay people and another version for their inner circle.

Is it ‘good’ science to teach the lay public the wrong version and not say it is wrong?

Not good PR either. People are not stupid especially when you consider that much of this science is done with our tax payers’ money.

The physics community cannot have it both ways.

]]> By: Tom Kerwick https://russian.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/11/the-kline-directive-technological-feasibility-2f#comment-157506 Mon, 03 Dec 2012 10:42:55 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=6259#comment-157506 Benjamin — actually that should be either a 3-dimensional surface of a 4-dimensional expanding sphere, or 4-dimensional surface of a 5-dimensional expanding sphere. I think the baking bread model is mainly used where the audience (i.e. the general public) might not be able to comprehend the Einstein model easily. In either case these are just models.

]]> By: Benjamin T. Solomon https://russian.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/11/the-kline-directive-technological-feasibility-2f#comment-157482 Sun, 02 Dec 2012 14:16:25 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=6259#comment-157482 Tom Kerwick, the bigger the Universe is estimated to be the more incorrect the baking bread model gets.

Regarding interstellar travel, see my next post,
http://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/12/the-kline-directive-technol…ibility-3a

]]> By: Tom Kerwick https://russian.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/11/the-kline-directive-technological-feasibility-2f#comment-157403 Fri, 30 Nov 2012 10:50:03 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=6259#comment-157403 Benjamin — Even just the observable Universe is 10^6 times larger than the Milky Way. We don’t know how much larger the Universe actually is. I could pick you up on a few other points too, but whether or not one prefers the Einsteinian 4-dimensional surface of a 4-dimensional expanding sphere or the more simple expanding raisin bread analogy — what on earth has any of this to do with the technological feasibility of interstellar travel?

]]>