Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2020
     
    Part 3
    Considering hyperloop and the flame thrower and the rescue torpedo and the neuralink leads to a diagnosis. Elon has difficulty with the concept that just having an idea doesn't make it a good one.
    •  
      CommentAuthorpcstru
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2020
     
    Posted By: Angus
    Posted By: Andrew Palfreymansmall telescope


    Gee thanks. We already have small telescopes in orbit. What is important is BIG telescopes with active correction for atmospheric distortion. These things now outperform Hubble. The muskmist will blind them. Perhaps we will be better able to fight each other as a result, but it begins to resemble a cultural locked-in syndrome.


    If you had all the satellites very well coordinated, it would be a big array. But could they do that and their day job?
    •  
      CommentAuthorTrim
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2020
     
    Super telescopes should be on the moon, connected to the internet so that the taxpayers who pay for them could if they wanted see what the telescope was viewing.
    •  
      CommentAuthoralsetalokin
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2020 edited
     
    Ah, these damned triple-point water planets. It's a good thing they are so rare. Here's another one, fully contaminated by meat, starting to eat itself since there's nothing else left to eat. No intelligence, in spite of the orbital debris cloud, nothing to see here, time to move on.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2020
     
    Posted By: pcstruIf you had all the satellites very well coordinated
    These presumably are optical small telescopes which means you have to preserve the optical phase - at frequencies in the hundreds of THz. We aren't even close to having the technology.

    Now if you could link all the satellites with very stable optical fibres, maybe you'd have a chance.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2020
     
    Posted By: TrimSuper telescopes should be on the moon, connected to the internet so that the taxpayers who pay for them could if they wanted see what the telescope was viewing.


    We're waiting Trimmie...in the meantime we have supertelescopes here ready for use. Maybe Elon should build a few on the moon before he launches the muskmist.
  1.  
    Posted By: AngusNow if you could link all the satellites with very stable optical fibres
    I knew you'd figure it out!
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2020
     
    Keeping them rigid will be a problem.
  2.  
    Isn't that what supercomputers are for? I mean, virtualization of rigidity. The computers know where the satellites are at any given instant, to some degree of resolution. They can thus time-correct the data sampled by the satellites, so the dirty sphere becomes a virtual perfect paraboloid or plane or whatever. All you lose is real-time imagery. But you've waited thousands of years for the data in the first place, so a few more seconds isn't going to matter much.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2020 edited
     
    Posted By: alsetalokinto some degree of resolution



    But that was my point. You have to resolve the phase. So in terms of distance that is submicron. Do we know satellite locations that well? If so, we must already be using coherent optical techniques to measure it, so no problem.
  3.  
    So you scan back and forth a little in phase-space until you get a good focus. It's a skill I've had to teach to some digital youth, but I'm sure you remember how to do it.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2020
     
    There is another problem. The light from astronomical objects is not monochromatic and coherent, so the relative locations of the satellites have to be known and constant absolutely, not with respect to some local reference on each satellite.
    •  
      CommentAuthorpcstru
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2020
     
    You can reference objects that are known and if you assume the accuracy of your knowledge of them, you can infer things about your location. You navigate some by what you are looking at, some by what the time is here and now, just like always.
  4.  
    The entire system would benefit from more spherical chickens.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2020 edited
     
    Posted By: pcstruYou can reference objects that are known and if you assume the accuracy of your knowledge of them, you can infer things about your location. You navigate some by what you are looking at, some by what the time is here and now, just like always.


    No you can't. Not to submicron accuracy over tens of thousands of km. And guesswork is not good enough for interferometry. Which is what you are doing when you combine telescopes to make an image.
  5.  
    But but nanographene AI superquantum computers...
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeFeb 8th 2020
     
    Well...except for that, of course.
  6.  
    My thesis advisor used to say that computers can do anything.
    His research assistant, who actually had to make the computers do something, sometimes begged to differ.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeFeb 8th 2020 edited
     
    I have found that to be true. Computers can do anything, which is a much wider range of outcomes than is generally desired.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeFeb 8th 2020