Just a word of encouragement to all our hardworking posters. You’ve all done well but SamuelA is going to need more support if he’s going to win this race. This is how things currently stand among the dedicated threads for our current leading pittees:
Well in the lead and the current favorite for an easy win: Shagnasty, the Misogynistic Prick, at 1270 posts
Just coming around the first bend in the #2 spot but far behind: SamuelA, the Bloviating Moron, at 439 posts
In the #3 spot but pretty much out of the running: Urbanredneck, the Trifecta of Ignorance, at 74 posts
Word from the stable is that if Bloviating Moron can get on the bridle in a comfortable fast trot there is still a chance that he can overtake the gelding Misogynistic Prick. But we need to cheer him on, folks. He needs your support. Give it your all.
I have to admit, there is a certain entertainment value in watching a young person so full of themselves and convinced that they have learned everything of value; ranting and raving about how they know everything and everyone else is a moron.
As I told my 18 year old niece when she graduated high school and went off to college;
“Your world is this big (holds hands up to basketball size) and you know this much of it (moves hands very slightly inward), so you think you know everything. But this world is, well, as big as this planet, and you only know this much (holding up hands again). So be open to learning and accept that you don’t actually know everything.”
As that So Crates guy once said;
“The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.”
Which leaves SamuelA straight out of the wisdom game.
SamuelA, I could point to many specific examples where you are completely wrong about pretty much anything you profess to be knowledgeable about, and I could make reasoned arguments against any of your idiotic claims. But I don’t want to risk getting the JohnT treatment. It’s much better to have you miss my posts and not saddle me with inane responses, so I’ll stick with childish insults.
Your level of stupidity coupled with unawareness is unparalleled on this board. I’ve seen the occasional poster dumber than you, but none so convinced of their superiority with so little justification. Your claims of victory after being schooled on your ignorance are transparent to the intelligent posters here. Even the below-average posters on this site could eat a bowl of alphabet soup and shit out a more scientifically correct response than any of your posts.
But I wasn’t schooled. I showed the posters that they were wrong, with specific evidence and arguments. They were wrong, except in a few cases, where I did admit fault.
Since you can’t see that, guess you aren’t an intelligent poster.
People, poeple, we are blessed to have the smartest man on the planet posting pearls of teh smart just for us . . . 'course just why the “smartest man on the planet” is busy posting on a message board instead of doing sciency stuff, well…
Maybe SamuelA is the SMotP’s computerized brain simulator? Yeah, I got nothing!
I will say, his ignore list is a post-it note taped to the side of his laptop monitor. He will still read and respond to you… you know, on your posts that are worthy of being un-ignored. We’ve seen this on this thread, as a matter of fact.
Quick race update: Bloviating Moron has advanced ten lengths to 449, but the gelding Misogynistic Prick has gained 11, for a net loss of one length for Bloviating Moron. Come on, folks, we can do better!
But for a moment of seriousness:
Absolutely spot-on and well said, Troutman.
I don’t fault people for not being particularly bright or not knowing things. My main problem with SamuelA is that although I can tolerate a good deal of justified arrogance among the truly knowledgeable, it totally drives me nuts when exhibited by a self-aggrandizing pompous moronic blowhard like him. He is convinced he owns the sum total of knowledge in something that he took some courses in, and facts hold no sway against his massive pomposity, despite the fact that he doesn’t even understand the basic meanings of the very words that he uses, like “computation” or “neuroscience”. I laid out just the latest of many, many example in post #435, but in case that’s too long for the casual reader, I give you a perfect abbreviated illustration in these two pronouncements:
Exhibit A: Don’t challenge a computer engineer on their understanding of computation
Then, just three days later:
Exhibit B: … I was fuzzy on the meaning of computation, from a CS course 10 years ago …
But in his own delusional world, SamuelA has “checkmated” everyone in sight, and put everyone who doesn’t agree with him on ignore. Maturity and intelligence personified, I say.
And when his world is empty and devoid of other people, he’ll just whine about how stupid everyone is, pat himself on the back for “winning” and move on to a new place.
Both on-line and in real life.
I wonder how he is with his own boss. If they disagree, does he call his boss a moron and then try to ignore him?
I don’t care. This is a redirect, and it belongs in the other thread.
SamuelA I will now raise the questions on the “assumptions” you have made for your ‘estimates.’ I’ll be “nice”. I will point out where your assumptions are either lacking, or do not cut the mustard due to politics or law. This is not “nitpicking”; imagine you’re trying to sell this to a panel of Engineers (you are).
There are gaps here: Based on what composite material? And you’re not clear on 1 km diameter or radius.
There are gaps here: What is it’s distance from Earth? And what is it’s current velocity?
Link to that article please. That change in velocity is only valid at certain ranges from the Earth. The closer it gets, the more of a velocity change on the asteroid you need. Swapping the frame of reference (and point of view) for a second to the asteroid (a puck) because we can’t move the Earth (you); if I take an accurate slapshot at you from the far end of the rink, you only need to move 0.5 m/sec until that puck crosses the ice for you to avoid it. If I’m 3 meters away from you with the same accurate slapshot, you need to move a kilofuck quicker to get out of the way. But, since we can’t move the Earth, we have to move the asteroid. You need a megafuckton more energy the closer it gets to move it aside. So, you need to define how far away the asteroid is before you assume a 1/cm change in velocity.
You need to assume a distance and velocity (ETA: I do this later for you), because this will A) tell you if you need a higher change in velocity, and B) will give you an estimated time to impact which will drive other factors (e.g. spacelift) later. . .
There are gaps here: What warhead are you using? Are you going to design a warhead from scratch? [Hint: no you’re not, not even in 10 years]. The Project Orion Drive was abandoned as wildly impractical [Hint: you will not detonate nuclear weapons over American soil, nor can you detonate them in the atmosphere due to the PNTBT as you pass through the atmosphere on the way to space.] Spacelift will come later. You will also need to tell me the blast overpressure of your chosen weapon’s effect in a vacuum when it is fuzed for a PD (or point detonation)–it will affect the force you impart on your asteroid. Why do you assume a 150 kT yield, and how does that correlate to blast overpressure in a vacuum?
This will be recomputed when you fill the earlier gaps. You have a faulty assumption: I do not understand why you are claiming a 300 kg nuclear-tipped projectile will impart 300 kg of force onto this asteroid. You don’t need nuclear weapons for this, you need giant fucking 300 kg stones. On detonation, there may or may not be 300 kg of force imparted by the nuclear explosive. You assume a 150 kT device–again, how much force will that impart on detonation in a vacuum?
I do not understand your 3 kg/kT correlation. Are you talking about primaries, secondaries, tertiaries, or total system mass? [Hint: there is no correlation between system mass and nuclear yield]. What ‘actual device’ did you use, and please link a citation for it.
You do not understand how difficult it is to build, test, and deploy a nuclear weapon with respect to politics or engineering. And, why won’t all of the rockets ‘make it’?
You haven’t done any sort of assumption of what the asteroid is made of…
Here’s how a legitimate estimate should be done (to start):
A 1km diameter asteroid, of Lead (the densest material–worst case scenario) is headed towards Earth. It’s volume is 0.523 km^3 (or 5.23x10^14 cm^3). With lead at 11.34 gm/cm^3, you’re kind of fucked with 5.93*10^12 kg of mass coming at you. For arguments’ sake, we shall assume we have spotted it 10 years before it crosses the point of our orbit (and hits us directly–acceleration or deviation due to gravity notwithstanding). This is a perfect, solid sphere tumbling (rotating about all three axes, but I am simplifying the rotational dynamics for you, otherwise targeting and imparting moments of inertia due to blast cannot be speculated unless we had a real-world shape to discuss) in space, zipping along at 10,000 km/sec, magically on orbital plane. 10,000 km/sec * 31,536,000 sec/year * 10 years gives you a range of 3.15x10^12 km from Earth. We will assume, for academics, that 1 cm/sec adjustment imparted orthogonally to it’s trajectory (our orbital plane) shall be sufficient to “lift” it above the Earth. This range and forces involved will come into play once you have a warhead identified. This is where we stop for now.
Do you now see how complex of a problem this is, and that you cannot just gloss over it with handwaving? You really screwed the pooch by not identifying a weapon system. And here is no correlation between system weight and yield.
I am no longer interested in participating in your science fair project. I simply highlight where you’ve passed over some very important details.
Well, you did some good work on the asteroid one. But the way your attitude is, if I did spend a year+ building a computer simulation of the asteroid, you’d say it wasn’t detailed enough. I could spend 10 years and a billion dollars, if I had it, and you’d say it wasn’t a real rocket. I could spend 30 years and a trillion dollars, if I had it, redirect some asteroids, and you’d say it was too unrealistically easy…
As for using simple analysis of complex problems : that’s a well accepted method of engineering. The idea is you proceed in order of increasing cost. Find out if the idea maybe could work in theory first, with an analysis that could fit on a napkin. Then, in a series of increasingly complex and expensive stages, you do more and more detailed models, then eventually physical prototypes, then integration prototypes, then eventually flight hardware, then eventually some test flights, then a first mission.
There is nothing wrong with as simple, basic analysis to see if you’re even in the ballpark. Says most credible scientists and engineers, it’s not me saying it.
