• VILenin [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Back in the days when UlyssesT was still around there was some mini struggle session over whether sending stuff into space would ever be cheap and over the pentagon UFO bullshit with obviously physically impossible feats. It won’t for reasons I’ve already stated, but I distinctly remember being lambasted as closed-minded for suggesting that violating the laws of thermodynamics and basic laws of physics isn’t possible. In addition to this argument, there was also the “have you considered that future bazinga tech might be able to break the laws of physics?” and “how do you know that inertia is actually real when you haven’t observed all possible actions? Just because it seems real doesn’t mean it is!” “Just because we haven’t been able to break the laws of physics doesn’t mean we can’t in the future!”

    Literal “just because you haven’t seen evidence for a unicorn hiding in my gaping asshole doesn’t mean it’s not there” type “arguments”

    People with obviously didn’t know shit about fuck talking out their ass.

    • Egon
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      deleted by creator

    • Smeagolicious [they/them]
      ·
      8 months ago

      I'm no expert in the physical nor economic factors necessary for space transport, but even the best theoretical ways to reduce the cost of space travel (like support infrastructure the US will never invest in) still requires an absurd upfront cost to at best help mitigate some of the cost of future launches. The Elon "spacex reusable rockets and floating platforms will get us to mars" grift bullshit could only put a miniscule dent in the costs necessary for regular transport if it worked as advertised, the "if" being critical. Unless I've gravely misinterpreted what I've read lol.