Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Maybe won't make any difference (Score 1) 142

Based on what we *know* right now, our best-bet is to build a series of self-sustainable "generation ships"; (very-large spacecraft, capable of sustaining human life over the course of several generations, including the necessary ecosystems to support such life.)

Such technology is at least theoretically do-able, from a technical standpoint.

From an ECONOMIC standpoint, of course, it is as impossible as faster-than-light travel. To expend the money required for such an enterprise, to send-off one or more such "generation ships", with no possible ROI within the lifetime (or thousands of lifetimes) of the investor, is not something that can be done with a civilization that does not even want to invest the money to educate their own children.

And this would only happen if we knew, for certain, that the destination worlds were inhabitable. (and not yet inhabited). And even if they were, we would have to wait thousands of years for the colony to develop to the point of economic viability so that they could even send a response.

Comment Google is quiet (Score 1) 328

Google is "troubled" but I doubt they will raise a much bigger fuss than that. Why? Because they are competing for government contracts against Microsoft and other vendors for Cloud services etc. So while this deeply undermines the company, they probably won't get too loud about it until it starts to wreck their reputation too severely.

Comment Re:Sounds like a problem... (Score 1) 507

The solution is pretty simple (re: "kicking companies' asses") . . . a Corporate Charter is a legal instrument GRANTED BY GOVERNMENT, to a corporation. It's in the common interest for corporate charters to exist, in most cases. But when that ceases to be - then the government should be much more eager to just revoke the charter. (In modern law, this is actually very difficult; akin to depriving people of property.

Comment Other conditons (Score 1) 263

If someone falls into a black hole, is their soul stuck there for the 62 zillion years it takes the black hole to evaporate?

If you pushed someone into a black hole, could you beat the murder rap by pointing out that he still hadn't finished falling in, from the jury's reference frame?

If you modified Shrõdinger's experiment so that the decay of an atom dropped the cat into a black hole rather than gassing it, then put a cat in the box to create a superposition of "the cat is in the black hole" and "the cat is not in the black hole", is it possible for the superposition to collapse to "the cat is not in the black hole"?

Comment Re:How do you see the entagled pair at the EH? (Score 1) 263

I don't think we can see anything at all, at present, other than their gravitational effect. For example, the mass of something at the center of our galaxy can be determined by the orbits of some stars zipping around it, and the size of those orbits put an upper bound on that something's diameter.

If we were nearer we should be able to see something similar to black body radiation, assuming we weren't blinded by the material swarming around it and falling in.

Interestingly, some physicists think that we might be able to "see" inside a black hole by detecting gravitons / gravity waves.

Slashdot Top Deals

I judge a religion as being good or bad based on whether its adherents become better people as a result of practicing it. - Joe Mullally, computer salesman