PollWould you use a washer/dish washer that cleaned without water (i.e., ultrasound or electricity)?
      – BorgClown, 2009-11-03 at 10:04:35   (40 comments)

On 2009-11-03 at 12:34:55, Lee J Haywood wrote...
I'm surprised by the ultrasound/electricity suggestions given that near-waterless washing machines already exist, e.g. those which use reusable nylon beads. I don't think I'd buy one unless it reached a high level of acceptance first. Even with the energy-efficient washing machine I already have I don't always use the economy setting (i.e. low temperature, longer wash).
On 2009-11-03 at 20:49:38, BorgClown wrote...
Do the nylon beds get embedded on intricate utensils, like ornate wine cups or cutlery?
On 2009-11-03 at 20:54:05, DigitalBoss wrote...
What if it cleaned with nuclear radiation and anti-matter?
On 2009-11-03 at 20:59:26, BorgClown wrote...
Set phasers to clean!
On 2009-11-03 at 21:11:47, BorgClown wrote...
Capt'n, the teflon coating can't take it anymore!
On 2009-11-03 at 21:12:01, BorgClown wrote...
You can't change the laws of dishwahing
On 2009-11-04 at 00:16:47, Lee J Haywood wrote...
@BorgClown: I wasn't talking about dishwashers - I don't own one of those. Oh, I missed the voting options before - somehow - is your Ogg the same one as mine, from the Oracle digests?
On 2009-11-04 at 01:23:03, DigitalBoss wrote...
"You can't change the laws of dishwashing" LMAO!
On 2009-11-04 at 03:34:30, BorgClown wrote...
@DigitalBoss: I'm really sorry I made you laugh, did it hurt?
On 2009-11-04 at 03:34:48, BorgClown wrote...
All those unused muscles...
On 2009-11-04 at 03:41:03, BorgClown wrote...
@Lee J Haywood: Precisely the same Ogg. I used to participate a lot, made it a kinda mission to get into a "best of digests" issue. Unfortunately people tend to ask a lot and give lousy answers in return, so it gets tiring after a while. Some answers are very worth it though.
On 2009-11-04 at 10:38:41, Lee J Haywood wrote...
@BorgClown: In that case you've used the wrong spelling - it was Og, not Ogg. Poor Ogwa, having to put up with him all the time... And Zadoc, poor Zadoc. (Apologies to the rest of you, who won't know what we're talking about). Oh, and naturally I did write my own Oracle server at one point and ran it at work. Unfortunately no-one used it, unsurprisingly.
On 2009-11-04 at 14:48:50, DigitalBoss wrote...
@Borg: That was just plain funny. I am still laughing.
On 2009-11-04 at 15:43:03, BorgClown wrote...
@Lee J Haywood: Ate, realized it too late, confused it with Ogg Vorbis.
On 2009-11-04 at 15:44:26, BorgClown wrote...
@Lee J Haywood: "naturally I did write my own Oracle server at one point and ran it at work. Unfortunately no-one used it, unsurprisingly". You, my friend, don't need more talent, you need more marketing though =P
On 2009-11-04 at 15:56:12, BorgClown wrote...
@DigitalBoss: Are you a Trekkie or just a Trekdom connoisseur?
On 2009-11-04 at 18:46:25, DigitalBoss wrote...
I guess you could call me a trekkie, but I don't go to meetings. I remember watching the original Star Trek when it was still in production. It came on Saturday night at 8:00 or 9:00 pm back in the late 60s early 70s. When I saw the new Star Trek movie, it brought a tear to my eye. What did I say to bring up Star Trek anyway?
On 2009-11-04 at 18:48:24, DigitalBoss wrote...
Should be: "You can't change the laws of dishwashing, Captain" [said with a thick scottish accent]
On 2009-11-04 at 18:54:48, Lee J Haywood wrote...
<tt>s/can't/cannae/
On 2009-11-04 at 21:09:10, DigitalBoss wrote...
what does that mean?
On 2009-11-04 at 21:22:02, BorgClown wrote...
Means a true Scottish accent: "You can'tcannae change the laws of dishwashing, Captain!"
On 2009-11-04 at 21:27:37, BorgClown wrote...
@DigitalBoss: I really envy you, I've only watched the reruns of TOS. Still, it was great to live the transitions between TOS and TNG, and later Voyager. Enterprise brought little change... Hey, this is a new topic already!
On 2009-11-04 at 21:33:43, BorgClown wrote...
@DigitalBoss: You brought Star Trek here by uttering technobabble, sir.
On 2009-11-05 at 02:52:36, DigitalBoss wrote...
I should not have mentioned anti-matter. I stay awake at night sometimes and think about what the view out the window would look like at warp 6. It would be very different in the front window than in the back one. What about the side window?
On 2009-11-05 at 06:27:46, BorgClown wrote...
Since you're familiar with Linux, have you installed lightspeed? It's a funny program that aims to show how objects look at relativistic speeds. You load a model, and a slider increases speed. As you go faster it starts to elongate and lose color. I'm sure other people will find it fascinating, but it only keeps me entertained for a little. Still worth a look, though.
On 2009-11-05 at 06:33:36, BorgClown wrote...
Of course, warp speed is faster than light, so anything goes regarding visuals. The common depiction is stars passing by crazily fast, as if light years became light days, but how can they see light if they are going faster than it? Also, reaching the speed of light means shifting light to the high and bottom ends of the spectrum, far from our visual range.
On 2009-11-05 at 06:36:07, BorgClown wrote...
I often wonder about this, and I think that's what makes Sci-Fi so great: Pondering the unexplored (im)possibilities of today.
On 2009-11-05 at 11:00:51, Lee J Haywood wrote...
As far as warp speed goes, the visuals seem a bit silly as they really don't pass stars especially quickly - it takes weeks for them to go relatively short distances - but they keep the details deliberately vague. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Warptable.gif Even if they were travelling at 1,000 times the speed of light, to get to the next star only 4 light years away would take over a day - so you wouldn't be likely to see hundreds or thousands of stars rushing by, would you? The shift in positions would be minor, although of course the light could/would be distorted. @BorgClown: lightspeed wasn't all that exciting - I just tried it. (-:
On 2009-11-05 at 11:08:14, Lee J Haywood wrote...
@BorgClown: All fiction is escapism, and Science Fiction as well as Fantasy both take the possibilities as far away from the Earth and your own life as possible whilst keeping it meaningful.
On 2009-11-05 at 14:18:41, DigitalBoss wrote...
Well, I have a theory. If travelling at 6x the speed of light, light from the stars directly behind you would never reach you. So there must be a circle of darkness directly to the rear. The diameter of the circle would grow the faster you go.
On 2009-11-05 at 14:19:26, DigitalBoss wrote...
Light from the stars directly in front, and to the sides would be different.
On 2009-11-05 at 14:20:15, DigitalBoss wrote...
A Doppler shift must be involved, in one way, or another.
On 2009-11-05 at 17:08:47, Lee J Haywood wrote...
@DigitalBoss: Well the view from behind in Star Trek definitely shows stars receding, not darkness. However, they travel by bending space so maybe you could claim that the light follows the warp bubble somehow. But even though the view in front would show some movement of the stars, even the stars to the side would hardly move at all - they wouldn't 'streak' past as they do in the series. Ah, but maybe they're not seeing stars at all - perhaps it's just the dust annihilating on the deflector shield! (Okay, so the stationary stars do streak at the start of the jump to warp speed, but that'll just be distortion from the warp bubble again).
On 2009-11-05 at 18:31:37, BorgClown wrote...
@Lee J Haywood: The warp scale seems to have been unified after TOS: http://www.star-fleet.com/ed/warp-chart.html Memory Alpha cites speeds beyond Warp 10 even after TOS, with a crazy warp 36 on the animated series: http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Warp_factor#...and_beyond
On 2009-11-05 at 18:39:18, DigitalBoss wrote...
I am not concerned with what the Star Trek community thinks, or what is their standard explanation. I am concerned with what really happens if you could move at 6 times the speed of light.
On 2009-11-05 at 19:01:46, BorgClown wrote...
Sadly, as far as we know, light speed is our universe's upper limit. The only promising theoretical alternative is wormholes, shortcuts instantaneously joining separate points of space. Inside a wormhole, you'd still travel at sublight speeds, but I don't know what would it look like to be inside one. Off topic, there's an amusing thought experiment where one wormhole end gets accelerated near light speed and brought back to the stationary end, transforming it into a time machine. That might explain TNG's obsession with time travel plots =) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_travel#Using_wormholes
On 2009-11-06 at 20:28:57, Lee J Haywood wrote...
@DigitalBoss: Even travelling close to the speed of light you would experience insane time dilation, assuming you had enough energy to go that fast, but travelling faster than the speed of light isn't considered possible. The Star Trek method is to bend space, which isn't known to be possible in the real world, so it's almost as though you're staying still and space is moving past you very quickly - so when they return home, no-one has aged as you'd expect with real-world general relativity.
On 2009-11-07 at 00:24:32, BorgClown wrote...
Do you remember what made so special the wormhole DS9 was all about? Did it allow to travel even faster?
On 2009-11-07 at 11:05:56, Lee J Haywood wrote...
@BorgClown: I did e-mail one of the writers for DS9 about my idea that worm whole actually involves travel through time and space, so when you arrive in the Gamma Quadrant you're seeing something very different to if you travelled there without the wormwhole. (Naturally they ignore all story suggestions from the outside world). But the Bajoran wormhole was simply a shortcut between the Alpha and Gamma quadrants of our galaxy. It could be that the Prophets residing inside the wormwhole were somehow breaking the laws of physics for travellers, if they lived outside normal space and time.
On 2009-11-07 at 18:40:44, BorgClown wrote...
@Lee J Haywood: Don't feel bad, I'm sure they were inundated with suggestions, probably much less polite than yours. Thanks for reminding me about the prophets, I didn't remember them. In fact, most of DS9 has slipped from my mind as I had to force myself to like the show.