Re: starship-design: Re: FTL travel

[Steve VanDevender <stevev@efn.org>]

STAR1SHIP@aol.com writes:
 > >  Please give a citation for these writings of Einstein that you believe
 > >  justify your position.  At best they are quite at odds with everything
 > >  else Einstein wrote about relativity.  If you claim that no one else can
 > >  see them because they are "non-publized" (sic) then you should not
 > >  expect us to believe that they exist or that they say what you claim
 > >  they say.
 > 
 > Would like to give you the citation but it was inadvertently thrown
 > out along with many text books and personal papers by stepfather when
 > I enlisted in the Air Force.

I just knew you'd say something like that.  Like I said, if you think
Einstein backs you up but can't cite a work that we can read and verify
then we have no reason to believe you about that.

 > Skepticism is not considered 
 > proof of an invention not working by reasonable men nor even good science as
 > the burden of nonworking proof is on you.

Build your invention and prove that it works.  I have no reason to
believe you if you don't do what you say you can do.  I don't have to
prove you wrong; you have to prove yourself right, not just by words or
trying to impress us with titles, but by actions.

Nobody can prove that FTL is impossible at this point, but no one has
proved that it is possible either.  The best proof of its possibility is
for someone to do it.  Until someone does the focus of this mailing list
will not be on trying to build starships using unknown and currently
unknowable properties of FTL drives, but on building starships that work
by proven principles.

 > Your fanciful claimed "Borg collective con-science(spelling intentional)" of 
 > speaking for "we physicists" is such non scientific nonsense I am surprised I 
 > responded.

Science is inherently collective thinking, in the sense that the truth
of a theory isn't determined by one person holding forth that it is so,
but by other people being able to verify the theory for themselves.  You
misquote me in claiming that I'm speaking for physicists; I'm speaking
about what they have come to understand about physics so far.

 > Your Academic Superior,
 > Na Na Na Na Na

You're not helping your credibility by name-calling or tossing around
titles.  If what you say makes sense and agrees with reality, we'll
believe you.  If you spout nonsense and bluster about how you must be
right because you're more educated than we are, then we won't.