The Cold Equations: part 1
If you've read it you remember it. The Cold Equation by Tom Godwin is considered to be required reading in many Math and Engineering programs. The equation in question is that of Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, patron saint of rocket scientists.
Δv = Ve * ln[R]
where
*Δv = Rocket's deltaV capability in m/s
*Ve = Rocket's exhaust velocity in m/s
*R = Rocket's proppelant/mass ratio
*ln[x] = Natural logarithm of "x" (the "ln" key on a scientific calculator)
In the story, the pilot of an Emergency Dispatch Ship, a spacecraft of limited range, discovers a stowaway. The stowaway is an 18-year-old girl trying to visit her brother who is a colonist on the planet to which the ship is traveling. Unfortunatly, the added mass of this stowaway means that the ship does not have sufficient fuel to land on that planet. To protect the mission and save his own life the pilot throws the young woman out an airlock.
The moral of the story, if it can be said to have one, is that there is no place for sentimentality in physics. Or, in the words of Richard Feynman, that "Nature can not be fooled." (The short story To Build a Fire by Jack London explores a similar theme.)
In a recent comment thread a regular commentor accused me (along with every other right-leaning individual) of being anti-intellectual. I would like to believe that through my vocation and prior posts that I have secured a certain level of intellectual credibility and thus I asked him/her to clarify.
This was the reply...
"An intellectual is a person who uses intelligence (thought and reason) and critical or analytical reasoning in either a professional or a personal capacity."
You know, not emotion like many of our politicians today. Also, a lot of the lies and flat-out ignorant falsehood being perpetrated would not happen if the people doing them were intellectuals. It's where people who are professionals in a field or experts are not respected for their professional opinion, where instead 'common sense' is being appealed to as if that's some sort of evidence.
Basically, it's just making stupid assumptions instead of listening to actual research and evidence. And I see it a lot in this country.
I found the bolded part to be rather ironic considering considering the tactics most often fielded in support in support of progressive canidates/initiatives...
^ Not emotional at all, nothing but rational self interest there. ^ ;)
I am actually inclined to agree with his/her basic premise that people, all too often, base thier positions on emotion rather than careful consideratiaon of available facts, but to imply that this problem is unique to a particular group/side is to demonstrate a distinct lack of self awareness.
Δv = Ve * ln[R]
where
*Δv = Rocket's deltaV capability in m/s
*Ve = Rocket's exhaust velocity in m/s
*R = Rocket's proppelant/mass ratio
*ln[x] = Natural logarithm of "x" (the "ln" key on a scientific calculator)
In the story, the pilot of an Emergency Dispatch Ship, a spacecraft of limited range, discovers a stowaway. The stowaway is an 18-year-old girl trying to visit her brother who is a colonist on the planet to which the ship is traveling. Unfortunatly, the added mass of this stowaway means that the ship does not have sufficient fuel to land on that planet. To protect the mission and save his own life the pilot throws the young woman out an airlock.
The moral of the story, if it can be said to have one, is that there is no place for sentimentality in physics. Or, in the words of Richard Feynman, that "Nature can not be fooled." (The short story To Build a Fire by Jack London explores a similar theme.)
In a recent comment thread a regular commentor accused me (along with every other right-leaning individual) of being anti-intellectual. I would like to believe that through my vocation and prior posts that I have secured a certain level of intellectual credibility and thus I asked him/her to clarify.
This was the reply...
"An intellectual is a person who uses intelligence (thought and reason) and critical or analytical reasoning in either a professional or a personal capacity."
You know, not emotion like many of our politicians today. Also, a lot of the lies and flat-out ignorant falsehood being perpetrated would not happen if the people doing them were intellectuals. It's where people who are professionals in a field or experts are not respected for their professional opinion, where instead 'common sense' is being appealed to as if that's some sort of evidence.
Basically, it's just making stupid assumptions instead of listening to actual research and evidence. And I see it a lot in this country.
I found the bolded part to be rather ironic considering considering the tactics most often fielded in support in support of progressive canidates/initiatives...
^ Not emotional at all, nothing but rational self interest there. ^ ;)
I am actually inclined to agree with his/her basic premise that people, all too often, base thier positions on emotion rather than careful consideratiaon of available facts, but to imply that this problem is unique to a particular group/side is to demonstrate a distinct lack of self awareness.