HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: frank@rover.uchicago.edu (Frank - Hardware Hacker - Borger)
Subject: Re: The Marching Morons (was Re: Cindy the Disco Queen)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Reply-To: frank@rover.uchicago.edu
Organization: Joint Center for Radiation Therapy
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 17:45:00 GMT

In article <1gnr5vINNik@gap.caltech.edu>, carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU writes...
>In article <15DEC199216015557@rover.uchicago.edu>, frank@rover.uchicago.edu (Frank - Hardware Hacker - Borger) writes:
>>	A good education thru 12th grade is a primary:
>>
>>	A/ Privilege
>>	B/ Right
>>	C/ Absolute necessity
> 
>None of the above.  It ought to be C, but if you've got a subculture that
>disdains education, throwing more money at schools isn't going to improve the
>education.

	Urk. You got me there. However, part is our general society. A few
	commercials talk about possible job opportunities at Mickey-D's, but
	most sell what we used to call gym shoes at greatly inflated prices
	by filling the air with flying basketballs.

   Frank R. Borger - Physicist    __       Internet:  Frank@rover.uchicago.edu
Michael Reese - Univ. of Chicago |___      Phone : 312-791-8075 fax : 567-7455
  Center for Radiation Therapy   | |_) _   In the first place God made idiots.
                                   | \|_)  That was for practice. Then he made
    "Birthplace of Softball"          |_)  school boards. - Mark Twain
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: mhorning@zeus.calpoly.edu (Mark E. Horning (Captain Neutrino))
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: General regulations?
Date: 12 Dec 92 00:59:27 GMT
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo

wa94002@black.ox.ac.uk (Mark F W Charsley) states
>If you want rules and regulations for space operas with "Realistic Physics",
>eg The Mote in God's Eye, how about:
>
>Thou shalt not send information (let alone spaceships) faster than the speed
>of light?
>
>Unfortunately The Mote in God's Eye uses an Anderson drive which seems to
>break this rule, as it bears a marked resemblance to your average Hyperdrive.
>
>Mark

Gee, i thought thats why they were called space operas, as opposed to
science fiction.
	On  a related note, The Moat around Murchenson's Eye has been
turned into the publisher, anyone know when it will be released?

Mark E. Horning, Physics 	A penny saved is a congressional oversite.	
mhorning@pan.calpoly.edu	Don't steal, the IRS hates competition.

If you can't love the constitution, at least hate the government.
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.science:3852 rec.arts.sf.misc:3531 rec.arts.startrek.tech:7073
From: jdnicoll@prism.ccs.uwo.ca (James Davis Nicoll)
Subject: Re: Territorial Disputes
Organization: University of Western Ontario, London
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 18:47:55 GMT

In article <BzEunM.ALL@brunel.ac.uk> mt90dac@brunel.ac.uk (Del Cotter) writes:
>
>I've got a paper on this.
>
>Author:  Martyn J. Fogg
>
>Title:   Temporal Aspects of the Interaction among the First Galactic 
>		 Civilisations: The "Interdict Hypothesis"
>
>Journal: ICARUS _69_, 370-384 (1987)
>
	material  deleted

>The inhabitants of a saturated galaxy necessarily agree, in the interests
>of stability, on certain conventions, one of which is to set aside the
>small number of stars formed in the last five billion years (~0.6%) as
>'wilderness preserves' (the old 'Zoo Hypothesis').

	Ah, what other conventions are there, and why  do they necessarily 
follow? Is it common for species to refrain from filling  all of an
available niche. what benefit is  derived from the  zoos?

>I don't buy it myself, but it does seem to fit in with Peter's ideas of
>inter-species peace and harmony.

							James  Nicoll
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: bcr@cernapo.cern.ch (Bill Riemers)
Subject: Re: Time Travel and Causality Violation
Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.science
Organization: CERN, European Research Center for High Energy Physics
	<1992Dec6.173452.10058@newstand.syr.edu> <8895@lee.SEAS.UCLA.EDU>
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 01:31:42 GMT

In article <8895@lee.SEAS.UCLA.EDU> leonardo@mills.seas.ucla.edu (Leonardo E. Blanco De Freitas) writes:

>   1) Forget time travel: it is impossible (I would guess that faster-
>      -than-light travel goes as well, for reasons I won't care to
>      mention...)

>   or

>   2) Allow more than one dimension of time. If you don't want all uni-
>      verses existing at the same time, that's fine. However, you can't
>      resolve certain paradoxes with one single timeline if time travel
>      is allowed (see a previous posting by someone else; sorry I don't
>      have the reference... :(  ).

You forgot two other possabilities possabilities:

    3)  Predestiny.  You can't have paradox, because everything has 
        already happened.  Also, the pure fact it exists anyways rules
        out all paradoxes.  (Basically this is just an application of
        the Anthropic princable for a singular universe that allows
        time travel.)

    4)  Limited predestiny:  Only events that could otherwise lead
        to paradoxes are predetermined.  The fact that the universe
        exists rules out paradoxes.  (In this form, we are making the
        minimum assuptions required by the Anthropic princable for 
        a singular universe that allows time travel.)  This is no
        stranger than saying complex masses exist but are
        unobservable.  

In a complete unified theory, paradoxes have to occupy 0% of phase space.
The nices way is to apply general princable such as time-travel is 
impossable, but things are still self consistent if we just addhoc
collapse any part of a wave function that is connected to a paradox.
People do this all the time.  For example consider what do you do if
you are solving a problem to determine the  length of a fence and end
up with a quadratic equation with both a negative and positive solution.
Do you cry paradox and say the fence can't exist, or do you just use the
positive solution and forget about the negative solution?  As long 
as there is a possable solution available you don't have a pardox.
i.e. It is doesn't have to be a paradox that I can kill my Grandpa
befor I was born, it only has to be a paradox if I must kill my
Grandpa to be born.  3&4 take care of the latter case by simply 
saying that if I must kill my Grandpa to be born, I don't exist.

                                   Bill
From: georged@meaddata.com (George Dibos)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Time Travel and Causality Violation
Date: 17 Dec 1992 21:21:51 GMT
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: talon.meaddata.com

In article <1632@tdat.teradata.COM>, swf@tools3teradata.com (Stan Friesen) writes:
|> Actually the greatest argument against the existance of time travel was brought
|> to my attention by my brother:
|> 
|> If it is possible why aren't we up to our ears in temporal archaeologists and
|> time tourists?
|> 
|> Can you imagine what Dallas in 1964(I think) would have been like if time travel
|> were possible?  At last, the chance to find out for yourself who *really* killed
|> JFK!!
|> 
|> Or the crowd in Moscow a couple of years ago when the Soviet Union collapsed!
|> [Imagine, Yeltsin saved by time travellers :-)
|> 
|> -- 
|> sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
|>   or
|> Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com



I've always figured that the buck stops there, too...  And the only ways
out of it are "prohibitions" against seeing such events, or something
that runs equally counter to human nature; or some variation on the
multiple universes theme (which always stuck me as near-religious wishful
thinking.)

Can anyone on the net offer anything better? 


+---------------------+--------------------------------+-----------------------+
| George Dibos        | Views expressed are my own.... | (513) 865-1689        | 
| Mead Data Central   +--------------------------------+ Software Engineer     | 
| P.O. Box 933        | Every day I drink a toast to   | NGS Update/Data Svcs. |  
| Dayton, Ohio  45401 | the wonders of beautiful women | georged@meaddata.com  | 
+---------------------+--------------------------------+-----------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: pksuk@mothra.syr.EDU (Peter K. Suk)
Subject: Re: Time Travel and Causality Violation
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 11:14:48 EST

Dear Scott,

	I'm a-gonna toast you a little.  It's nothing personal, and we'd 
love to hear your input in the future.  But I've got to singe you just
a bit right now.

In article <Bz9pw5.Csn@newcastle.ac.uk> S.A.McIntyre@durham.ac.uk writes:

>Personally I think that time travel is an attractive concept and
>perhaps possible, but the concept of paradoxes makes me consider
>whether or not it will ever be possible in the frame of reality we are
>now experiencing.

It should make you discount the possibility.  The principle is the same
as in Einstein's gedankenexperiments.  

>What would happen if Our Reality did develop the ability to flit
>through the various dimensions of time / space....and came back to the
>say present, when such an ability is not known, and introduced it.
>Ignoring the paradox of the needed reality to facilitate the
>travellers sojourn in the first place, could time travel be
>accelerated in development by applying principles and devices we do
>not currently understand or have?

"Ignoring the fact that the thing is impossible, could we, like, do it with
technology doohickies we don't have yet?  Like Sooner!?"

And The Gleeb Glorbles the Garbleflocks.  Voon!     ;-)

>My wife thinks I read too much science fiction.
>
>Perhaps she's right.

She is wrong.  Read more science fiction.  It is a very important genre.
(As well as being a fascinating literary paradigm, but most sci-fi books
are really just in the 'genre.')

>But I'm bored with Earth and the time I'm stuck in...anyone else want out?

Go to a con.  Go to lots of cons.  Take you wife along.  Costume.  Speak
with kindred spirits!  Have a ball!

>Scott

Could you beam me up?

	--Peter Kwangjun Suk

(P.S.  Don't be all hurt, Scott, and go away.  That's not my point.)
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.science:3786 alt.folklore.science:4367
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science,alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: The Marching Morons (was Re: Cindy the Disco Queen)
Date: 16 Dec 1992 18:08:50 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Dec16.155034.16562@alw.nih.gov>, singley@helix.nih.gov (Erick Singley) writes:
=[steps up on personal soapbox]
=Hey! Watch where you point that gun! Some of us here in the "noxious US 
=Gov" are working on food, drug, and health research.  Four floors in a wing 
=of building 10 here at NIH are for AIDs research alone. Other branches clean up
=the private sector's (and government's) chemical waste.  We are not all paper 
=pushers sucking your tax dollars away while doing crossword puzzles!
=[meekly steps down]
=
=>        B/ With a current (15 year) history of property taxes rising at the
=>           rate of 12% a year, by the time I retire, I will be spending 100%
=>           of my income paying property taxes. Obviously I can not do this,
=>           (and continue to pay for heat, light etc. not to mention Income taxes
=
=Obviously you can never reach 100% by increasing  numbers by a % (though 
=you could get a serious amount of .9s *grin* )

I hope that's not representative of the mathematical ability of the employees
of NIH.  Since the tax is applied to his property, increasing that tax by 12%
per year must inevitably raise his taxes to above his income, unless his income
is increasing at more than 12% per year.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
From: rclark@lpl.arizona.edu (Richard Clark x4971)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Teleport Gate Paradox (New?)
Date: 12 Dec 92 08:37:09 GMT
Organization: Lunar & Planetary Laboratory, Tucson AZ.


You have a situation like:

       |    |
     > |-):-| <
       |    |

The situation needs more definitions. Do both teleport screens act
simultaneously as transmitter and receiver?
Suppose you move a transmit screen past a stationary object instead of movint
the object through the fixed screen. The ojbect would just 'pile up' at the
stationary receiver screen.

Kind of reminds me of a situation in Contact by C Sagan. He had a 'one sided'
teleport door. He didn't have his characters play with it though. I wondered
what would happen if somebody poked a stick (or arm:-( through the plane from
the non active side and then pulled it back!

Richard Clark
rclark@lpl.arizona.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
Subject: Re: Time Travel and Causality Violation
Organization: Johns Hopkins University CS Dept.
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 03:13:31 GMT

In article <kRV=++#@engin.umich.edu> ingles@engin.umich.edu (Ray Ingles) writes:
>>What happens if the object I declare that I am going to put through the
>>time machine is a Gold Brick?  If I get one, I take both bricks and
>>leave.  The next night, I do the same thing with two bricks. After 64
>>nights, I have enough bricks to cover california to quite a depth.
> Yes, it teleports objects from one universe to another. In one universe,
>you wind up with enough gold to gild the Grand Canyon, while a lot of other
>universes lose a gold brick.

Not necessarily.  They all have a time machine, and can do it to.

Figure out a scheme that in universe N takes a brick both from 2N and 2N+1.
Each universe ends up with twice as many bricks as it used to have.  (The
mapping from "what number universe do we want to take it from" to "when must
we do stuff with the time machine and brick" ends up rather complicated, but
it can be done.)
--
"the bogosity in a field equals the bogosity imported from related areas, plus
the bogosity generated internally, minus the bogosity expelled or otherwise
disposed of."  -- K. Eric Drexler

Ken Arromdee (arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu, arromdee@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: pksuk@mothra.syr.EDU (Peter K. Suk)
Subject: Re: Alien configuration
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 01:13:41 EST

In article <440@blue.cis.pitt.edu> pjhst10+@pitt.edu (Peter   J Hill) writes:

>In article <1992Dec9.222944.13161@enterprise.rdd.lmsc.lockheed.com>  writes:
>
>>	You have both made the mistake that the aliens' are from a
>> natural ecosystem.  If the biological warfare agencies of humanity
>> want the aliens to use as weapons, why can't the aliens' originally
>> have been created as biological weapons.
[deleted]
>
>I doubt that the creators of the Alien Universe wanted the Aliens to
>be the result of genetic engineering.  The Company, in my mind, wanted the
>aliens to expand their existing technology, and try and find some spin-
>off tech, from the aliens.  Either that, or they would send an egg to a
>ship of planet that they wanted to wipe all the life off of.  Think about
>what would happen if one alien got loose. These beast were bred for
>survivial.

Actually, as weapons, the Aliens are not all that awesome.  In all three
movies, they had an advantage because no one knew what to expect, or no
one listened to Ripley.  The only worlds that an egg could wipe out would
be remote settlements -- settled worlds would wipe them out in a hurry.  

Their key flaw, of course, is their dependence on other creatures to 
reproduce.  Though this may be a fantastic mechanism to insure that
they don't turn against the creator-race (supposedly the creators
have incompatible DNA) it limits the alien's ultimate power.  

	--Peter Kwangjun Suk


Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: ingles@engin.umich.edu (Ray Ingles)
Subject: Re: Time Travel and Causality Violation
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 15:38:54 EST
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor

In article <1632@tdat.teradata.COM> swf@tools3teradata.com (Stan Friesen) writes:
>Actually the greatest argument against the existance of time travel was brought
>to my attention by my brother:
>
>If it is possible why aren't we up to our ears in temporal archaeologists and
>time tourists?

 Well, according to some formulations of general relativity, it might be
possible to build a time machine. "All" you need is a rotating black hole
or an ultradense, ultrafast rotating cylinder.
 The kicker is that you can't go any further back than when the black hole
was formed or the cylinder was spun up. So, perhaps the time tourists can't
get back here. But there'll be a *lot* of them at the opening ceremony for
the first time machine... :->
 
>sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
>  or
>Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com


Sincerely,

Ray Ingles                  || The above opinions are probably
                            || not those of the University of
ingles@engin.umich.edu      || Michigan. Yet.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: treitel@gracie.IntelliCorp.COM (Richard Treitel)
Subject: Re: Territorial Disputes
Date: 16 Dec 92 00:02:38 GMT
Organization: preferably none

In article <1090@dgaust.dg.oz>, young@spinifex.dg.oz (Philip Young) writes:
|> So they're cosmic vagrants.  Their territory then becomes their ship(s).
|> plus a possible defensive perimeter.  They *still* have territory.  How
|> would they acquire their tradable knowledge?  Who, do you suppose, would
|> just give these romantic vagabonds their technology, or anything
|> commercially or militarily useful?  They *might* sell goods and services,
|> but I doubt they'd ever sell trade secrets, never mind the military stuff.
|> I imagine they'd also get a pretty hard time if they came within spying
|> distance of a system-based culture. Freelance traders at best, with a
|> culture as likely to produce pirates as heavenly harmony.
|>  
|> 
|> -- 
|> Philip R. Young 
|> Data General Australia Pty. Ltd.

So go read James Blish's "Cities in Flight" tetralogy (esp. volumes 2 and 3,
"A Life For The Stars" and "Earthman, Come Home" (the latter is much better))
and decide how you like his answers to these questions.

		- Richard
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science,rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: ingles@engin.umich.edu (Ray Ingles)
Subject: Re: Time Travel and Causality Violation
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 92 12:01:38 EST
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor

In article <1992Dec19.233309.21957@newstand.syr.edu> pksuk@mothra.syr.EDU (Peter K. Suk) writes:
>In article <HrT=vTA@engin.umich.edu> ingles@engin.umich.edu (Ray Ingles) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec16.111449.15440@newstand.syr.edu> 
>>pksuk@mothra.syr.EDU (Peter K. Suk) writes:
>	1) [smoldering a little around the edges]  Thanks, that was very
>	   informative.  

 Impressive, Peter. I've never seen sarcasm condense out of the atmosphere
before... but it got all over my screen. Does Windex get that off? :->

>	2) You completely misunderstood WHERE the 'little toasting'
>	   was in my post.

 On reflection, I think you're saying that you were 'flaming' Scott for
unclear expression, and not that the idea he was getting at (that of
self-causing technology) was complete trash?

>	3) It's not defacto paradoxes that should worry one, just the 
>	   mere possibility.
>
>	--Peter Kwangjun Suk

 Well, yeah, paradoxes are a concern if you're going to talk about time
travel... but of course, so many stories endeavor to explain that time
travel doesn't *really* mean paradoxes... :->

Sincerely,

Ray Ingles                  || The above opinions are probably
                            || not those of the University of
ingles@engin.umich.edu      || Michigan. Yet.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
From: bucknerb@bnr.ca (Brent Buckner)
Subject: Re: Time Travel and Causality Violation
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ontario, Canada
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 20:32:46 GMT

In article <1632@tdat.teradata.COM> swf@tools3teradata.com (Stan Friesen) writes:
>Actually the greatest argument against the existance of time travel was brought
>to my attention by my brother:
>
>If it is possible why aren't we up to our ears in temporal archaeologists and
>time tourists?
>

Quite properly, you note that this is an objection to the existence
of time travel.  However, it is not an objection to time travel
being possible post-1992.

Consider the development of a time machine that can send you back
in time, but no earlier than the machine itself came into 
existence (e.g. a technology that relies upon a receiver).

The closed-timelike-curve mechanisms for time travel (worm holes,
rotating Kerr black holes, etc) meet the restriction.

-- 
at Bell-Northern Research
voice:        (613) 765-2739
Canada Post:  P.O. Box 3511, Station C, Ottawa, Canada, K1Y 4H7
I do not claim that BNR holds these views.  
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.science:3785 alt.folklore.science:4366
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science,alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: The Marching Morons (was Re: Cindy the Disco Queen)
Date: 16 Dec 1992 18:05:51 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <15DEC199216015557@rover.uchicago.edu>, frank@rover.uchicago.edu (Frank - Hardware Hacker - Borger) writes:
>	A good education thru 12th grade is a primary:
>
>	A/ Privilege
>	B/ Right
>	C/ Absolute necessity

None of the above.  It ought to be C, but if you've got a subculture that
disdains education, throwing more money at schools isn't going to improve the
education.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
From: max@west.darkside.com (Erik Max Francis)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: Teleport Gate Paradox (New?)
Date: 16 Dec 92 00:24:00 GMT
Organization: The Dark Side of the Moon +1 408 245 SPAM

"Andrew C. Plotkin" <ap1i+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

> Now do the old trick of putting the receiver gate above the transmitter.
> Put a rock in between and let it fall. Now conservation goes all to hell
> -- the rock will continually gain kinetic energy from nowhere. *This* is
> why I think such gates can never exist.

Absolutely.  Conservation laws hold, and so do conservation laws dealing 
with _potential_ energy.  If you try to teleport something uphill, you're 
going to have to steal energy from somewhere to do it, or energy is going 
to have to be leeched out of the apparatus (or the cargo!) to get it 
there.  Similarly, if you teleport something downhill, energy is 
going to be emitted somewhere.

This is not to mention differences in kinetic energy . . .

----------
Erik Max Francis   Omnia quia sunt, lumina sunt.  Coming soon:  UNIVERSE _ | _
USmail:  1070 Oakmont Dr. #1 San Jose CA 95117  ICBM:  37 20 N  121 53 W _>|<_
UUCP:  ..!apple!uuwest!max   Usenet:  max@west.darkside.com   464E4F5244   |