from what I know, all that is based on heavy numerical simulations (prone to errors in the assumptions, lack of more thorough numerics, etc). The simulations are based on parameters determined from measurements made from distances longer than those that will be reached with this new probe, and on assumptions also extrapolated from everything observed "from here". Summed up, that explanation could be right or completely wrong. We have to measure more and from smaller distances.

LOL. You only read that book in your whole life, didn't you?

yes, and keep also a class for explaining things about santa claus, etc.

It's funny that you feel this way about conspiracy theories (I mean US people), because the subject transforms into either not believing *at all* in conspiracies, or believing *all* of them. Don't you think the world is more complicated? Don't you think that with your attitude you'll be missing real complots when they happen? Oddly enough, this attitude is only present in the US, any idea why?

I wouldn't say raising a human up to adulthood is cheap...

never

would you read a speech from a Mullah speaking of internet? no, why? you don't care a shit about that illiterate piece of ...

wow! this is an amazing fact... why should that be? The pope is an idiot, obviously, no one intelligent will ever defend the want of substituting reality with a fairy tale; it is coward and childish, and well studied in psychology. In the future this kind of people will be treated, and of course no one will ever read on their opinions, as if they had something important to say.

Oh my fucking god.... we are so willing that all those fucking believers disappear and lets us build a world without dellusions...

The church is not the exclusive enemy of atheists, it is of everybody civilized. But more than the church, it is the fact that most world population prefer to believe in something than to check it.

are you saying it is dropping in the USA? I thought there they had the record of believers per citizen...

Optimal control theory gives you a function (trajectory over time, or acceleration vector over time) which minimizes a given functional (a function of functions) in this case I imagine that the total amount of fuelt spent (with the constraint that it reaches the lifetime desired). Summary: find the trajectory x(t) such that Fuel(x(t)) is minimized. This algorithm is well developed, you can even use it in quantum mechanics (give the desired hamiltonian(t) such that the evolution of the state is such and such at the end of the evolution, with the minimum of $whatever achieved along time).

I bet that in a thousand years from now we will consider life as anything having a)enough presence of nonequilibrium thermodynamics states, and b)the ability to perform universal computation (either classical or quantum, or maybe another yet undiscovered more general thing). This could include, as foreseen by Asimov, lakes of superconducting metals in remote planets. Will vegetarianism in the future include moral attitudes for superconducting helium inside high field magnets? Will we see an invasion of Earth by superconducting metal intelligent beings on a hunt-those-superconducting-torturers/bastards?

Maybe in Pluto there is a colony of intelligent robots (which communicate through gravity waves, i.e. civilizations withouth a theory of quantum gravity wouldn't detect their communications) and they are waiting for our civilization to build enough autonomous electronic components, so that at a given point they will send a signal/virus, take control of all our electronic infracstructure and take on planet's control. The threats of civilization always come from possibilities that we weren't able to imagine.

Glorious! Where are the +5 funny+5youmadethepointinasentence=+10 ?

The fallacy lies in the fact that results are present at all levels of abstraction. Doing an effort is already a result, at least for sentient beings, who modify their own personality and virtues just by the mere "trying". The result of failure or success is another step in the results chain, which again modifies the personality of the person. This is why someone before said that this method could be dangerous: you have to evaluate the obvious effects but most importantly the effects on the personality after two decades of application of such methodology.

He can only save US against the will of its own people.