The war is nearing the end!
[ November 12, 2001: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
But i have already heard that U.N. humanitarian reports stating war crimes are being committed by the N.A. in Mazar-e-Sharif, Taliban POWs being executed and the such. Not that anybody thinks that that is that awful in light of what happened (but if we want to maintain our moral fiber, we should), but its true that this isnt good guys vs bad guys. This is us helping the bad guys get the worse guys. Hardly good material for a war movie.
And I think that whoever ends up in charge, we'll have trouble reigning them in.
Taking capitals does not win wars. (Napoleon, Napoleon, Napoleon.) This is especially true in this case, where the Taliban is organized more like a resistance movement than a government. We can't win by smashing their chain of command because they don't have a chain of command in the traditional sense. Beyond that, the situation in the southern half of the country is much different than that in the north.
And, of course, not every goal in this conflict can be achieved through military force anyway.
Things are far from over, unfortunately.
Taliban essentially driven out of the northern half of the country, when a few months ago they controlled 90% of it, their numbers and bases dwindling.
Perhaps some of the folks in the now Alliance-controlled areas know where BinLaden is hiding, hm?
I was listening to a talk radio show yesterday, and some guy brought up the fact that we haven't been doing much Bin Laden hunting. Rather than finding Bin Laden and delivering his head on a stick to those who were affected by the 9/11 attacks, we're concentrating our efforts toward decimating the Taliban. At this point, how can we be sure Bin Laden is still in Afghanistan? For all we know, he could be hiding out in a unabomber style shack in Montana.
P.S. Did anyone see the latest episode of South Park where Stan, Kyle, Kenny, and Cartman got trapped in a cargo plane and wound up in Afghanistan. LOL The South Park version of Bin Laden was absolutly classic!
[ November 14, 2001: Message edited by: MIB ]
All MY post did was state some easily verifiable facts.Why would I be bitter? MY president currently has the highest approval ratings in history! Campaign 2004 is already underway! Then, in 2008, it's MY turn!
I saw that South Park episode. The best part was Cartman giving BinLaden the 'Bugs Bunny / Elmer Fudd' treatment. HA!
To be frank, his approval ratings are high because of the boasted sense of patriotism and what not. It isn't necessarily because 80 to 90% of the population actually enjoyed the fact that Bush flushed 10 years worth of projected budget surpluses down the shitter.(I think it's safe to say that given our current economic situation, those budget projections aren't gonna be worth their weight in dog s**t.) If it weren't for 9/11, his approval rating would still be stagnating at around 55% or so.
This is not to say I don't approve of bombing the s**t out of the Taliban. 
[ November 14, 2001: Message edited by: MIB ]
Speaking of which, aren't you and Omega always going on about how inaccurate polls are?
quote:
He raised taxes, causing a recession, which Clinton proceeded to lie about during his campaign.
Clinton lied about the fact that Bush rose taxes and started a recession? If anything, I would think think he would never shut up about it sense he was running against Bush after all.
Wait -- that's a good thing.
I once had a conversation with him and he was telling me that turning anti-matter into a useable power source was impossible for some reason. I can't remember what he said to explain why. Care to refreash my memory, O?
Was that little tidbit pointless? Well.....yes. Come to think of it, why did I even mention it?
Clinton lied about the fact that Bush rose taxes and started a recession?
No, he lied about the length and extent of the recession. He claimed the recession was still going on when it had ended many months earlier. He claimed it was the worst economy since the Great Depression, which was a major exaggeration.
Oh, come on, Tom! Share your newfound knowledge!
I once had a conversation with him and he was telling me that turning anti-matter into a useable power source was impossible for some reason.
On a planet, antimatter would be useless. For planet-based power sources, you convert existing materials into energy: wood, oil, uranium, what have you. To use planet-based anti-matter generators, you'd have to find a large supply of pre-existing anti-matter. That's difficult, to say the least.
One more thing. Spelling was always my weakest subject. It was when I was in public schools, it still is today, and it probably will always my weakest subject. Is that so hard to understand. *sniff* I bet there is at least one thing that even you absolutly suck at, Omega.
[ November 16, 2001: Message edited by: MIB ]
Basic energy dynamics... you always get less energy out of any system than you put into it. The only way to 'win' is to increase efficiency or find new sources of energy.
And the 'lowered taxes' should take care of the 'domestic policy' question, especially when the market rebounds in 2002.
[ November 16, 2001: Message edited by: First of Two ]
quote:
No, he lied about the length and extent of the recession. He claimed the recession was still going on when it had ended many months earlier. He claimed it was the worst economy since the Great Depression, which was a major exaggeration.
When did he claim that? Surely you can cite sources.
And isn't this a violation of your "I Won't Be A Talking Head" pledge?
quote:
Oh, come on, Tom! Share your newfound knowledge!
Yes, Tom, it's so much more fun when someone else shows Omega what the inside of his own ass looks like.
Rob -- if all Bush is planning on doing domestically is "lowering taxes" and people think it'll "take care of him politically on the domestic agenda", then you guys need to start pulling your heads out of your asses.
quote:
Originally posted by First of Two:
Basic energy dynamics... you always get less energy out of any system than you put into it. The only way to 'win' is to increase efficiency or find new sources of energy.
Exactly. I'm sure that at some point in the future, we'll find a way to do it without using as much energy as we currently need to do it.
We'd have more energy if we DIDN'T do it, so what would be the point?
[ November 16, 2001: Message edited by: MIB ]
Really, this isn't rocket science. Or Algebra, even.
[ November 16, 2001: Message edited by: MIB ]
Say I have 400 Zorks of energy to use.
Making one Gleeb of antimatter costs, say, 100 Zorks of power. So you have 4 Gleebs.
The first law of thermodynamics, which applies to ALL energy-producing systems, states that you CANNOT get an energy-producing system to produce more, or even as much, as it takes to create it.
This means at BEST, with near MIRACULOUS efficiency, one Gleeb can produce maybe 90 Zorks. And it's more likely, given how hard it is to make antimatter, that one Gleeb will produce something like 40 Zorks.
so you're left with 4 Gleebs producing 40 Zorks each = 160 Zorks
When you could have left things be and had 400 Zorks to use.
[ November 16, 2001: Message edited by: MIB ]
Oil releases already-stored energy via a chemical reaction
Anti-matter produces energy via turning itself and an equal amount of normal matter into pure energy. No chemical reactions or any of that crap is nesseccary. No matter is left. The only by-product is energy and radiation. It's all about the simple E=MC2 stuff and such.
Besides, Anti-matter is only half of what is needed. The other half, normal matter, obviously doesn't need to be created. You can get it anywhere. Take all your garbage and use that.
Take a manufactured fuel. (anti-matter) By itself it can't produce more energy than was used to create it. However, if you mix in another fuel (normal-matter) that you do not have to spend energy to get, then you'll be getting somewhere.
[ November 16, 2001: Message edited by: MIB ]
Creating antimatter isn't easy. You're certainly right to argue that it is possible that it will get easier. But it won't ever get that easy, because nothing can.
Having said that, let's keep in mind that this doesn't mean antimatter is useless. Far from it. It makes an ideal replacement for rocket fuel. Just not for kerosene. You see?
Antimatter will NOT be working alone. Once created, an X amount of antimatter will be mixed in with an equal amount of normal matter. Both the antimatter AND the normal matter will then be generating a huge amount of energy as they are destroying each other. The anti-matter will not be the sole producer of energy in the reaction.
[ November 16, 2001: Message edited by: MIB ]
It's like an argument where one person is speaking Etruscan. Not that this sort of thing hasn't happened before, here...
Rev-up your anti-matter factory.
Make the anti-matter.
Mix it with normal matter.
Both begin to destroy each other. In essence, the matter and anti-matter are being converted into pure energy and radiation.
The energy that has been made from the anti-matter will go back to your anti-matter factory.
The energy made from the normal matter will go into our homes and our computers, and allow us to fight with each other over whether or not power via anti-matter is feasable.
The amount of power generated would be much greater than the amount power that can be generated by any nuclear fission or fusion power plant sense 100% of all the matter involved is transformed into energy where as only a tiny bit of mass is transformed into energy during fusion and fission reactions.
[ November 16, 2001: Message edited by: MIB ]
OK, we have to have a pre-existing source of stored energy to get any use out of it, right? Well, matter IS a pre-existing source of stored energy. You just need anti-matter to utilize it. So say you take a chunk of matter with a mass of two kilos, and convert half of it to anti-matter. You've expended the energy it takes to convert one kilo, but you can get TWO kilo-equivalents of energy out of it. So if you could get the efficiency of the conversion process so that it cost less than 200% of the energy equivalency of a given mass to convert that mass to anti-matter, you COULD get a gain out of it.
Now, the question is, how does one go about switching the polarity of matter, and is it physically possible to get the process that efficient?
[ November 17, 2001: Message edited by: Omega ]
Use 100 units of energy to make 10 units of antimatter. Annihiliate the 10 units of antimatter w/ 10 units of matter and get 20 units of energy, for a net loss of 80 units of energy.
I believe that's what people ment by saying that it would take more energy to create the antimatter than what we would get out of it.
You have learned well, grasshopper.
The energy required to CHANGE a particle from matter to antimatter will ALWAYS be more than is produced by the annihilation of that particle, so the net result will ALWAYS be a loss.
Hmm...
Okay, I see what he's saying.
I suppose that's possible, but I very much doubt it. as it is right now, we need large, energy-intensive particle accelerators to produce even the smallest amount of antimatter, something like 1 nanogram a year, I believe.
I suppose that our technology might eventually progres to the point at which we can manufacture relatively large amounts of antimatter with more efficiency, but we're talking a long, long way off.
On the other hand... if we were to use large-scale solar power plants, perhaps on orbital platforms, to produce the energy, then Thermodynamics would be satisfied (the Sun produces WAY more energy).
We already have all the theories behind it proven, plus a few working prototypes, the technology will probably mature over the next 20 years.
I was more worried that id have to fight my anti-me in a glowing, smoke-filled fuchsia-colored psychedelic corridor for the rest of eternity. But then i thought about it and realized that with no food or water id probably die within a week or two along with my double. That eternal torment shit freaks me out
Kirk said that was a bridge between universes so thats how the two Lazaruses (Lazari?) could fight there despite their differences..
And how could a transference to another place somehow remove the necessity for your body to need energy which it gains by breaking down solid food stuffs and water to hydrate its cells? Would i miraculously evolve into a plant that can absorb purple light energy? Instantly? What are you, a Voyager writer?!
possibly the Lazarus ship acted like a spin reverser and 'made' you into antimatter or made the antimatter you into a matter you, or possibly you only existed in that state between because there was no 'you' in the period of time in which your molecules orbits were reversing and your energy structure was static. This presupposes that there is an end to this process, that is that the tunnel must logically end with your spin resolving itself into matter and you entering the matter universe or vice versa. So when the exits were removed, would the corridor still exist, with the Lazaruses in it?
It seems that they had physical reality while they were in the tunnel, as each time they came out after the fighting they had physical injuries like cuts or bruises. If that is true, wouldnt aging continue, since there was linear time in the tunnel (progressing from the entrance, to the fight, to the injury, to the exit) and conscious thought along with it. So one of the effects of time passing is your body expending energy, and needing it to be replenished.
And in the case that they recieved injuries from each other, would the Lazaruses be injured and killed if they continued fighting? how many hours would it continue until a neck broke or a skull caved? They quite obviously cut each other up pretty good each time they came out of it
As poetic as it would be for them to continue fighting for all eternity, it just seems like science wouldnt support it.
(And another thing.. in the antimatter universe there didnt seem to be an Enterprise there. Kirk went through and found lazarus chilling on the empty planet (presumably there wasnt an antimatter kirk that was charged into our universe, otherwise someone would have noticed him emerging immediately after Kirk left and departing again) So we destroyed the exit to the tunnel in our universe, but the antimatter-Lazarus' ship was still there in the other. Maybe they both escaped that way.. and destroyed that universe. Did Kirk condemn that other universe by sealing the door and saving our own? Untold googols of lifeforms wiped out by his act?)
I just realized the episode probably had something about destroying the other Lazarus' ship.. never mind that last part
[ November 18, 2001: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]
When X kilograms of Matter and Y kilograms of AntiMatter are mixed, the annihilation produces a fixed amount of energy (where E = (X + Y) * C ^ 2); assume for the moment X and Y are equal). In order to sustain MIB's perpetuum mobile (a hyperthetical mechanism running ad infinitum unless subject to external influence), E would have to be formed in such sufficient quantities by the initial reaction that the net energy gain of the whole system would be greater than zero. This is impossible - a loss of energy always occurs, through friction, heat, radiation, etc.
AM has to be created (matter and energy are interchangable - this is naturally also true for AM) from scratch: 'reversing the polarity' of existing conventional matter is simply not feasible (at our current level of technological development... breakthroughs in quantum mechanics might allow for this).
So, unless we could somehow alter the constants of the universe, devices such as MIBs factory will remain in the realm of sci-fi. Antimatter is certainly a very viable source of power, but not an everlasting one.
* Note 1: although the destruction of M and AM results in 100% pure energy, not all of it can be effectively utilized.
* Note 2: X + Y kgs. of M and AM produce E. Haul in another 2X kgs. of M (cost: some percentage of E). The maximum amount of AM that can be obtained from 2X is 2X (100%). But the most efficient reaction is achieved when X = Y. Therefore, 2X is split into two identical halves (X and Y). This also requires a substantial fraction of E. The proces of containing and storing Y, as well as controlling the M/AM reaction and harnassing the energy from it, takes E too. And finally, the energy needs to be moulded in a shape that we can work with - electricity. Another percentage of E is expended to accomplish this.
The net result is < zero.
[ November 18, 2001: Message edited by: Mojo Jojo ]
*blink*
*blink*
You have problems.