<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_17_1526204</id>
	<title>Interstellar Hydrogen Prevents Light-Speed Travel?</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1266424380000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>garg0yle writes <i>"As if relativity wasn't enough to prevent us traveling at light speed, Professor William Edelstein of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine is now claiming that the interstellar hydrogen, compressed in front of the ship, would <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/17/star\_trek\_scuppered/">bring the journey to a shocking end</a>.   'As the spaceship reached 99.999998 per cent of the speed of light, "hydrogen atoms would seem to reach a staggering 7 teraelectron volts," which for the crew "would be like standing in front of the Large Hadron Collider beam."'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>garg0yle writes " As if relativity was n't enough to prevent us traveling at light speed , Professor William Edelstein of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine is now claiming that the interstellar hydrogen , compressed in front of the ship , would bring the journey to a shocking end .
'As the spaceship reached 99.999998 per cent of the speed of light , " hydrogen atoms would seem to reach a staggering 7 teraelectron volts , " which for the crew " would be like standing in front of the Large Hadron Collider beam .
" ' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>garg0yle writes "As if relativity wasn't enough to prevent us traveling at light speed, Professor William Edelstein of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine is now claiming that the interstellar hydrogen, compressed in front of the ship, would bring the journey to a shocking end.
'As the spaceship reached 99.999998 per cent of the speed of light, "hydrogen atoms would seem to reach a staggering 7 teraelectron volts," which for the crew "would be like standing in front of the Large Hadron Collider beam.
"'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172332</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>Narpak</author>
	<datestamp>1265049960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>UM, I thought the plan was to scoop them up and use them for fuel, ie. you WANT those hydrogen atoms to pile up in front of the ship.</p></div><p>As I understand it for a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramscoop" title="wikipedia.org">Ramscoop</a> [wikipedia.org] type system you want those hydrogen atoms. However a ramscoop is meant to travel at sub-lightspeed. Presumably for faster than light you might want something that phases out, teleports, or whatever; to avoid hitting a small meteor and getting a large hole in your ship (I am presuming that hitting a rock at 500.000 m/s is bad).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>UM , I thought the plan was to scoop them up and use them for fuel , ie .
you WANT those hydrogen atoms to pile up in front of the ship.As I understand it for a Ramscoop [ wikipedia.org ] type system you want those hydrogen atoms .
However a ramscoop is meant to travel at sub-lightspeed .
Presumably for faster than light you might want something that phases out , teleports , or whatever ; to avoid hitting a small meteor and getting a large hole in your ship ( I am presuming that hitting a rock at 500.000 m/s is bad ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>UM, I thought the plan was to scoop them up and use them for fuel, ie.
you WANT those hydrogen atoms to pile up in front of the ship.As I understand it for a Ramscoop [wikipedia.org] type system you want those hydrogen atoms.
However a ramscoop is meant to travel at sub-lightspeed.
Presumably for faster than light you might want something that phases out, teleports, or whatever; to avoid hitting a small meteor and getting a large hole in your ship (I am presuming that hitting a rock at 500.000 m/s is bad).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176212</id>
	<title>Cerenkov radiation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265019540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cool.... high energy charged particles zooming through the water in my eyeball make pretty blue Cerenkov bursts.</p><p>As far as standing in the beam goes, it's not that far fetched.  Back in the days of 5-20 GeV/c beams at Brookhaven (say in the 70's) there were folks who used to stand looking up the beamline using Cerenkov light in the Mark One Eyeball to "find the beam".</p><p>Besides, somewhere the difference between beam energy and flux has to be reckoned.  I mean there are whopping high energy particles hitting the atmosphere with some regularity (see he Pierre Auger Observatory.  The flux is low, but the energy makes LHC look like a toy.    Maybe the original article covers flux considerations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cool.... high energy charged particles zooming through the water in my eyeball make pretty blue Cerenkov bursts.As far as standing in the beam goes , it 's not that far fetched .
Back in the days of 5-20 GeV/c beams at Brookhaven ( say in the 70 's ) there were folks who used to stand looking up the beamline using Cerenkov light in the Mark One Eyeball to " find the beam " .Besides , somewhere the difference between beam energy and flux has to be reckoned .
I mean there are whopping high energy particles hitting the atmosphere with some regularity ( see he Pierre Auger Observatory .
The flux is low , but the energy makes LHC look like a toy .
Maybe the original article covers flux considerations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cool.... high energy charged particles zooming through the water in my eyeball make pretty blue Cerenkov bursts.As far as standing in the beam goes, it's not that far fetched.
Back in the days of 5-20 GeV/c beams at Brookhaven (say in the 70's) there were folks who used to stand looking up the beamline using Cerenkov light in the Mark One Eyeball to "find the beam".Besides, somewhere the difference between beam energy and flux has to be reckoned.
I mean there are whopping high energy particles hitting the atmosphere with some regularity (see he Pierre Auger Observatory.
The flux is low, but the energy makes LHC look like a toy.
Maybe the original article covers flux considerations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171250</id>
	<title>news?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265046780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>when i was young (30years ago<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... *snif*) it was already quite well known that even with 10\% light speed interstellar matter tend to heat up your spaceship until destruction<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... so whats new about that with even faster speeds?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>when i was young ( 30years ago ... * snif * ) it was already quite well known that even with 10 \ % light speed interstellar matter tend to heat up your spaceship until destruction .... so whats new about that with even faster speeds ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>when i was young (30years ago ... *snif*) it was already quite well known that even with 10\% light speed interstellar matter tend to heat up your spaceship until destruction .... so whats new about that with even faster speeds?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173578</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>trentblase</author>
	<datestamp>1265053860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why would I want to measure travel time externally?  The closer you get to C, the shorter the distance to Alpha Centauri seems.  And this dilation increases asymptotically as you approach C.  So if I'm travelling at 99.999998\% of C, and you're travelling at a mere 99.9\%, you will age much faster during the same trip.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would I want to measure travel time externally ?
The closer you get to C , the shorter the distance to Alpha Centauri seems .
And this dilation increases asymptotically as you approach C. So if I 'm travelling at 99.999998 \ % of C , and you 're travelling at a mere 99.9 \ % , you will age much faster during the same trip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would I want to measure travel time externally?
The closer you get to C, the shorter the distance to Alpha Centauri seems.
And this dilation increases asymptotically as you approach C.  So if I'm travelling at 99.999998\% of C, and you're travelling at a mere 99.9\%, you will age much faster during the same trip.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173880</id>
	<title>Re:Considering the energy required. . .</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1265054880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you also calculated what the mass of those 100 kg will be, when it&rsquo;s at 0.99999998c?</p><p>In light-speed space ship, black hole will be sucked in by YOU!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you also calculated what the mass of those 100 kg will be , when it    s at 0.99999998c ? In light-speed space ship , black hole will be sucked in by YOU !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you also calculated what the mass of those 100 kg will be, when it’s at 0.99999998c?In light-speed space ship, black hole will be sucked in by YOU!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171794</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>Austerity Empowers</author>
	<datestamp>1265048340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or is that Buzzard Collectors?</p><p>True story, a friend liked to take his muscle car out to race on a deserted road in the country. One particular day there was some dead something on the side of the road with a bunch of buzzards doing their thing. Long story short, it turns out the fender of a Pontiac Firebird is a Buzzard Collector.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or is that Buzzard Collectors ? True story , a friend liked to take his muscle car out to race on a deserted road in the country .
One particular day there was some dead something on the side of the road with a bunch of buzzards doing their thing .
Long story short , it turns out the fender of a Pontiac Firebird is a Buzzard Collector .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or is that Buzzard Collectors?True story, a friend liked to take his muscle car out to race on a deserted road in the country.
One particular day there was some dead something on the side of the road with a bunch of buzzards doing their thing.
Long story short, it turns out the fender of a Pontiac Firebird is a Buzzard Collector.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172036</id>
	<title>easy solution</title>
	<author>hypergreatthing</author>
	<datestamp>1265049060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just emit anti-matter in the front of the ship, annihilate the hydrogen and everything else in the way.</p><p>I'll take my Nobel peace prize now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just emit anti-matter in the front of the ship , annihilate the hydrogen and everything else in the way.I 'll take my Nobel peace prize now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just emit anti-matter in the front of the ship, annihilate the hydrogen and everything else in the way.I'll take my Nobel peace prize now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171138</id>
	<title>Re:What would happen?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265046480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It makes block holes out of you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It makes block holes out of you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It makes block holes out of you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173370</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>drooling-dog</author>
	<datestamp>1265053080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bringing reality into the picture isn't going to make you very popular in these parts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bringing reality into the picture is n't going to make you very popular in these parts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bringing reality into the picture isn't going to make you very popular in these parts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175754</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>osu-neko</author>
	<datestamp>1265017920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Maybe it's not possible to colonize the galaxy in the way suggested by that approximation, since the stars aren't distributed evenly?</p></div><p>Oh, and, actually, they pretty much are.  Spiral arms are optical phenomena due to the locations of the newest and brightest stars (which aren't really likely to have attractive planets for colonization in any case).  Sun-like stars are as evenly distributed through the galactic pancake as food coloring is in your purple pancakse after you spend 10 minutes mixing the batter.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe it 's not possible to colonize the galaxy in the way suggested by that approximation , since the stars are n't distributed evenly ? Oh , and , actually , they pretty much are .
Spiral arms are optical phenomena due to the locations of the newest and brightest stars ( which are n't really likely to have attractive planets for colonization in any case ) .
Sun-like stars are as evenly distributed through the galactic pancake as food coloring is in your purple pancakse after you spend 10 minutes mixing the batter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe it's not possible to colonize the galaxy in the way suggested by that approximation, since the stars aren't distributed evenly?Oh, and, actually, they pretty much are.
Spiral arms are optical phenomena due to the locations of the newest and brightest stars (which aren't really likely to have attractive planets for colonization in any case).
Sun-like stars are as evenly distributed through the galactic pancake as food coloring is in your purple pancakse after you spend 10 minutes mixing the batter.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173914</id>
	<title>Re:Fascinating limitation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265055000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wasn't the point of Antimatter reactions that you could carry just the anti-matter, and suck the real-matter part of the fuel out of the interstellar medium with something like a ram scoop?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Was n't the point of Antimatter reactions that you could carry just the anti-matter , and suck the real-matter part of the fuel out of the interstellar medium with something like a ram scoop ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wasn't the point of Antimatter reactions that you could carry just the anti-matter, and suck the real-matter part of the fuel out of the interstellar medium with something like a ram scoop?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31194842</id>
	<title>Interstellar Hydrogen Prevents Light-Speed Travel?</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1266507180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No.  Special Relativity prevents light-speed travel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
Special Relativity prevents light-speed travel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
Special Relativity prevents light-speed travel.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172466</id>
	<title>Paging Dr Bussard</title>
	<author>Gothmolly</author>
	<datestamp>1265050320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You need that hydrogen to power the spaceship !</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You need that hydrogen to power the spaceship !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You need that hydrogen to power the spaceship !</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173394</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265053200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am a physicist.
<br>
At 99.999998\% the speed of light, the trip to Alpha Centauri would only take about 7 hours for those on the ship.  For those on earth, it would still seem like 4.37 years.  So it wouldn't help with interstellar commerce to go so fast, but for the purposes of colonization the extra speed makes a huge difference.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a physicist .
At 99.999998 \ % the speed of light , the trip to Alpha Centauri would only take about 7 hours for those on the ship .
For those on earth , it would still seem like 4.37 years .
So it would n't help with interstellar commerce to go so fast , but for the purposes of colonization the extra speed makes a huge difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a physicist.
At 99.999998\% the speed of light, the trip to Alpha Centauri would only take about 7 hours for those on the ship.
For those on earth, it would still seem like 4.37 years.
So it wouldn't help with interstellar commerce to go so fast, but for the purposes of colonization the extra speed makes a huge difference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173078</id>
	<title>Don't forget</title>
	<author>dandart</author>
	<datestamp>1265052120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Without our dear inertial dampers, we'd take ages to accelerate to that velocity. Or die whilst being squished into our seats.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Without our dear inertial dampers , we 'd take ages to accelerate to that velocity .
Or die whilst being squished into our seats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Without our dear inertial dampers, we'd take ages to accelerate to that velocity.
Or die whilst being squished into our seats.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31180128</id>
	<title>Re:What would happen?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265043540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You won't be having children, but seeing this is slashdot that shouldn't be too much of a worry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You wo n't be having children , but seeing this is slashdot that should n't be too much of a worry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You won't be having children, but seeing this is slashdot that shouldn't be too much of a worry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173778</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1265054520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Silly you. As if that was the biggest problem.</p><p>Your biggest problem will be to prevent whole star systems from falling into the black hole you would become in the process of accelerating a object with real mass like that.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Silly you .
As if that was the biggest problem.Your biggest problem will be to prevent whole star systems from falling into the black hole you would become in the process of accelerating a object with real mass like that .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Silly you.
As if that was the biggest problem.Your biggest problem will be to prevent whole star systems from falling into the black hole you would become in the process of accelerating a object with real mass like that.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175330</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>Gilmoure</author>
	<datestamp>1265016600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Star Trek? Bussard Ramjets were <a href="http://news.larryniven.org/biblio/display.asp?key=109" title="larryniven.org">popularized by Larry Niven</a> [larryniven.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Star Trek ?
Bussard Ramjets were popularized by Larry Niven [ larryniven.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Star Trek?
Bussard Ramjets were popularized by Larry Niven [larryniven.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172636</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265050860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Bussard Collector is part of a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bussard\_ramjet" title="wikipedia.org">Bussard Ramjet</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>The Bussard ramjet is a system of spacecraft propulsion proposed in 1960 by the physicist Robert W. Bussard. A moving spacecraft would use enormous electro-magnetic fields to collect and compress hydrogen from the interstellar medium. The hydrogen would be forced into a progressively constricted magnetic field, which would compress it until thermonuclear fusion occurs. The magnetic field would then direct the heated gas in the direction opposite to the intended direction of travel, thereby accelerating the vessel.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar\_travel" title="wikipedia.org">More generally</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Bussard Collector is part of a Bussard Ramjet [ wikipedia.org ] .The Bussard ramjet is a system of spacecraft propulsion proposed in 1960 by the physicist Robert W. Bussard. A moving spacecraft would use enormous electro-magnetic fields to collect and compress hydrogen from the interstellar medium .
The hydrogen would be forced into a progressively constricted magnetic field , which would compress it until thermonuclear fusion occurs .
The magnetic field would then direct the heated gas in the direction opposite to the intended direction of travel , thereby accelerating the vessel.More generally [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Bussard Collector is part of a Bussard Ramjet [wikipedia.org].The Bussard ramjet is a system of spacecraft propulsion proposed in 1960 by the physicist Robert W. Bussard. A moving spacecraft would use enormous electro-magnetic fields to collect and compress hydrogen from the interstellar medium.
The hydrogen would be forced into a progressively constricted magnetic field, which would compress it until thermonuclear fusion occurs.
The magnetic field would then direct the heated gas in the direction opposite to the intended direction of travel, thereby accelerating the vessel.More generally [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171742</id>
	<title>Particle accelerator you say?</title>
	<author>Pad-Lok</author>
	<datestamp>1265048160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If thats the case, I would'nt mind traveling at light-speed as long I'm provided with a pair of rubber bands and a liquid lunch on the trip. Where do I sign on?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If thats the case , I would'nt mind traveling at light-speed as long I 'm provided with a pair of rubber bands and a liquid lunch on the trip .
Where do I sign on ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If thats the case, I would'nt mind traveling at light-speed as long I'm provided with a pair of rubber bands and a liquid lunch on the trip.
Where do I sign on?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172054</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>camperdave</author>
	<datestamp>1265049060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Personal Pet Peeve:<br>
Spelled - Constructed a word out of letters.<br>
Spelt - a type of grain.<br> <br>
(Yes, I know spelled can be spelled "spelt", but it makes me cringe seeing it that way.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personal Pet Peeve : Spelled - Constructed a word out of letters .
Spelt - a type of grain .
( Yes , I know spelled can be spelled " spelt " , but it makes me cringe seeing it that way .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personal Pet Peeve:
Spelled - Constructed a word out of letters.
Spelt - a type of grain.
(Yes, I know spelled can be spelled "spelt", but it makes me cringe seeing it that way.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171618</id>
	<title>Somebody would bloody kill you</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1265047860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They had enough problems already, anybody going to mess with it this time is going home in boxes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They had enough problems already , anybody going to mess with it this time is going home in boxes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They had enough problems already, anybody going to mess with it this time is going home in boxes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171902</id>
	<title>It's the ultimate green energy</title>
	<author>Touvan</author>
	<datestamp>1265048580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This sounds like power for the warp drive!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This sounds like power for the warp drive !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This sounds like power for the warp drive!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173164</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>arth1</author>
	<datestamp>1265052360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um, of course it's designed for traveling sub-lightspeed.  Everything is, because "speed" loses its meaning at exactly the speed of light.<br>"FTL" belongs in pulp sci-fi.  Let's keep it there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , of course it 's designed for traveling sub-lightspeed .
Everything is , because " speed " loses its meaning at exactly the speed of light .
" FTL " belongs in pulp sci-fi .
Let 's keep it there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, of course it's designed for traveling sub-lightspeed.
Everything is, because "speed" loses its meaning at exactly the speed of light.
"FTL" belongs in pulp sci-fi.
Let's keep it there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173684</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>agw</author>
	<datestamp>1265054160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>1) Warp drive doesn't posit a traditional "go-very-fast-through-normal-space" type of spacecraft engine - it warps[*] space-time (hence the name!) in front of and behind the spacecraft - see <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre\_drive" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">here</a> [wikipedia.org] for an explanation. The spacecraft itself is sitting in a bubble of normal space, possibly even at rest.</p></div><p>At least one Star Trek TNG book and a Stargate:Atlantis episode deal with that when the protagonists encounter near light speed vessels and have no means of just flying along side.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) Warp drive does n't posit a traditional " go-very-fast-through-normal-space " type of spacecraft engine - it warps [ * ] space-time ( hence the name !
) in front of and behind the spacecraft - see here [ wikipedia.org ] for an explanation .
The spacecraft itself is sitting in a bubble of normal space , possibly even at rest.At least one Star Trek TNG book and a Stargate : Atlantis episode deal with that when the protagonists encounter near light speed vessels and have no means of just flying along side .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) Warp drive doesn't posit a traditional "go-very-fast-through-normal-space" type of spacecraft engine - it warps[*] space-time (hence the name!
) in front of and behind the spacecraft - see here [wikipedia.org] for an explanation.
The spacecraft itself is sitting in a bubble of normal space, possibly even at rest.At least one Star Trek TNG book and a Stargate:Atlantis episode deal with that when the protagonists encounter near light speed vessels and have no means of just flying along side.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171472</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>callmetheraven</author>
	<datestamp>1265047320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Pak Scouts ran one bussard ramjet in front of another, with the second burning the exhaust from the first as fuel! If you don't have a hyperdrive, all that hydrogen is a feature, not a bug.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Pak Scouts ran one bussard ramjet in front of another , with the second burning the exhaust from the first as fuel !
If you do n't have a hyperdrive , all that hydrogen is a feature , not a bug .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Pak Scouts ran one bussard ramjet in front of another, with the second burning the exhaust from the first as fuel!
If you don't have a hyperdrive, all that hydrogen is a feature, not a bug.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173444</id>
	<title>Re:Considering the energy required. . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265053380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An earth sized solar panel with 100\% efficiency weighting in at 100 kg? Your ideas are intriguing...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An earth sized solar panel with 100 \ % efficiency weighting in at 100 kg ?
Your ideas are intriguing.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An earth sized solar panel with 100\% efficiency weighting in at 100 kg?
Your ideas are intriguing...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172328</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>thomst</author>
	<datestamp>1265049960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Proposed by the physicist Robert W Bussard (hence "Bussard Ramjet"), popularised by Larry Niven</p></div><p>
ITIYM "Proposed by the physicist Robert W Bussard (hence "Bussard Ramjet"), popularised by Poul Anderson in his novel <i>Tau Zero."</i></p><p>
Kids these days<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Proposed by the physicist Robert W Bussard ( hence " Bussard Ramjet " ) , popularised by Larry Niven ITIYM " Proposed by the physicist Robert W Bussard ( hence " Bussard Ramjet " ) , popularised by Poul Anderson in his novel Tau Zero .
" Kids these days .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Proposed by the physicist Robert W Bussard (hence "Bussard Ramjet"), popularised by Larry Niven
ITIYM "Proposed by the physicist Robert W Bussard (hence "Bussard Ramjet"), popularised by Poul Anderson in his novel Tau Zero.
"
Kids these days ...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172646</id>
	<title>Collisions?</title>
	<author>nmg196</author>
	<datestamp>1265050860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That problem assumes you actually have to physically travel through all the intermediate space to facilitate faster than light travel. If you just take a slow trip through a wormhole (if they exist) then you might not hit anything at any significant speed.</p><p>Before I get modded down for mentioning something fictious like wormholes in a scientfic argument, bear in mind that faster-than-light travel is also totally ficticious too and most likely will never happen<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)  You could also argue of course, that if you've gone through a wormhole to facilitate faster than light travel between two places, that you haven't actually travelled faster than light - you've simply taken a shortcut.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That problem assumes you actually have to physically travel through all the intermediate space to facilitate faster than light travel .
If you just take a slow trip through a wormhole ( if they exist ) then you might not hit anything at any significant speed.Before I get modded down for mentioning something fictious like wormholes in a scientfic argument , bear in mind that faster-than-light travel is also totally ficticious too and most likely will never happen : ) You could also argue of course , that if you 've gone through a wormhole to facilitate faster than light travel between two places , that you have n't actually travelled faster than light - you 've simply taken a shortcut .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That problem assumes you actually have to physically travel through all the intermediate space to facilitate faster than light travel.
If you just take a slow trip through a wormhole (if they exist) then you might not hit anything at any significant speed.Before I get modded down for mentioning something fictious like wormholes in a scientfic argument, bear in mind that faster-than-light travel is also totally ficticious too and most likely will never happen :)  You could also argue of course, that if you've gone through a wormhole to facilitate faster than light travel between two places, that you haven't actually travelled faster than light - you've simply taken a shortcut.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171322</id>
	<title>Re:What would happen?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265047020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think one of the scientists at the LHC said it would be roughly equivalent to 180 kilograms of TNT exploding in your chest. Ow.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think one of the scientists at the LHC said it would be roughly equivalent to 180 kilograms of TNT exploding in your chest .
Ow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think one of the scientists at the LHC said it would be roughly equivalent to 180 kilograms of TNT exploding in your chest.
Ow.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172970</id>
	<title>Re:Considering the energy required. . .</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1265051760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I also just fail to see how this is terribly interesting.  Sorry, yeah, I like science and it's kind of an interesting little bit of trivia or something, but putting aside the technicalities, doesn't this just boil down to, "If you are going really really really fast and you hit something, it's going to cause damage.  Space isn't completely empty, so you're going to hit stuff even in 'empty space'."?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I also just fail to see how this is terribly interesting .
Sorry , yeah , I like science and it 's kind of an interesting little bit of trivia or something , but putting aside the technicalities , does n't this just boil down to , " If you are going really really really fast and you hit something , it 's going to cause damage .
Space is n't completely empty , so you 're going to hit stuff even in 'empty space' .
" ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I also just fail to see how this is terribly interesting.
Sorry, yeah, I like science and it's kind of an interesting little bit of trivia or something, but putting aside the technicalities, doesn't this just boil down to, "If you are going really really really fast and you hit something, it's going to cause damage.
Space isn't completely empty, so you're going to hit stuff even in 'empty space'.
"?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</id>
	<title>Economics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265047500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interstellar travel is fundamentally an economic paradox &mdash; ignoring, of course, such fantasies as Warp drives.</p><p>Sending a Shuttle-sized craft to Alpha Centauri in a matter of years would require roughly the current total energy consumption of humanity.</p><p>Only when our civilization advances to the point that we harness a significant portion of the Sun&rsquo;s total energy output would the energy budget for interstellar travel approximate the same proportion of the energy budget we spend today on interplanetary missions.</p><p>One can suggest &ldquo;sleeper ships,&rdquo; but building mechanical devices that will survive thousands of years is as hard a problem as throwing them across light years of distance. Any gas will leak out of any container in such a timeframe, and no plastic or rubber seal would last a fraction of the time necessary. The next thought is to provide power to the ship during the long journey, but you need as much total energy as for getting there fast &mdash; and, if you can comfortably survive for millennia in interstellar space, why even bother with stars in the first place?</p><p>Oh &mdash; and the Fermi Paradox applies especially well. Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system, and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period.</p><p>Interstellar travel makes for great space opera, but it has no more bearing on reality than unicorns and dragons.</p><p>Cheers,</p><p>b&amp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interstellar travel is fundamentally an economic paradox    ignoring , of course , such fantasies as Warp drives.Sending a Shuttle-sized craft to Alpha Centauri in a matter of years would require roughly the current total energy consumption of humanity.Only when our civilization advances to the point that we harness a significant portion of the Sun    s total energy output would the energy budget for interstellar travel approximate the same proportion of the energy budget we spend today on interplanetary missions.One can suggest    sleeper ships ,    but building mechanical devices that will survive thousands of years is as hard a problem as throwing them across light years of distance .
Any gas will leak out of any container in such a timeframe , and no plastic or rubber seal would last a fraction of the time necessary .
The next thought is to provide power to the ship during the long journey , but you need as much total energy as for getting there fast    and , if you can comfortably survive for millennia in interstellar space , why even bother with stars in the first place ? Oh    and the Fermi Paradox applies especially well .
Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system , and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period.Interstellar travel makes for great space opera , but it has no more bearing on reality than unicorns and dragons.Cheers,b&amp;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interstellar travel is fundamentally an economic paradox — ignoring, of course, such fantasies as Warp drives.Sending a Shuttle-sized craft to Alpha Centauri in a matter of years would require roughly the current total energy consumption of humanity.Only when our civilization advances to the point that we harness a significant portion of the Sun’s total energy output would the energy budget for interstellar travel approximate the same proportion of the energy budget we spend today on interplanetary missions.One can suggest “sleeper ships,” but building mechanical devices that will survive thousands of years is as hard a problem as throwing them across light years of distance.
Any gas will leak out of any container in such a timeframe, and no plastic or rubber seal would last a fraction of the time necessary.
The next thought is to provide power to the ship during the long journey, but you need as much total energy as for getting there fast — and, if you can comfortably survive for millennia in interstellar space, why even bother with stars in the first place?Oh — and the Fermi Paradox applies especially well.
Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system, and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period.Interstellar travel makes for great space opera, but it has no more bearing on reality than unicorns and dragons.Cheers,b&amp;</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175274</id>
	<title>Alcubierre drive</title>
	<author>DJRumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1265016420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't that what a warp bubble is for?</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre\_drive" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre\_drive</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't that what a warp bubble is for ? http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre \ _drive [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't that what a warp bubble is for?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre\_drive [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176434</id>
	<title>Re:Take that, sci-fi debunkers!</title>
	<author>amorsen</author>
	<datestamp>1265020440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Aerodynamic in the Earth sense of the word doesn't matter. You can make the ship any shape you want, all that counts is your cross-section.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Aerodynamic in the Earth sense of the word does n't matter .
You can make the ship any shape you want , all that counts is your cross-section .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aerodynamic in the Earth sense of the word doesn't matter.
You can make the ship any shape you want, all that counts is your cross-section.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31181234</id>
	<title>an idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266526140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quoting the original article under the link: "As the spaceship reached 99.999998 per cent of the speed of light, "hydrogen atoms would seem to reach a staggering 7 teraelectron volts", which for the crew "would be like standing in front of the Large Hadron Collider beam".</p><p>This is a very bad thing, because humans in the path of this ray would receive a dose of ionising radiation of 10,000 sieverts, and as Bones McCoy would doubtless confirm, the lethal dose is 6 sieverts.</p><p>The result? Death in one second."</p><p>We could use it to execute the deathrow prisoners!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Quoting the original article under the link : " As the spaceship reached 99.999998 per cent of the speed of light , " hydrogen atoms would seem to reach a staggering 7 teraelectron volts " , which for the crew " would be like standing in front of the Large Hadron Collider beam " .This is a very bad thing , because humans in the path of this ray would receive a dose of ionising radiation of 10,000 sieverts , and as Bones McCoy would doubtless confirm , the lethal dose is 6 sieverts.The result ?
Death in one second .
" We could use it to execute the deathrow prisoners !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quoting the original article under the link: "As the spaceship reached 99.999998 per cent of the speed of light, "hydrogen atoms would seem to reach a staggering 7 teraelectron volts", which for the crew "would be like standing in front of the Large Hadron Collider beam".This is a very bad thing, because humans in the path of this ray would receive a dose of ionising radiation of 10,000 sieverts, and as Bones McCoy would doubtless confirm, the lethal dose is 6 sieverts.The result?
Death in one second.
"We could use it to execute the deathrow prisoners!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171346</id>
	<title>Re:What would happen?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265047020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is what happens <a href="http://lhc-machine-outreach.web.cern.ch/lhc-machine-outreach/components/beam-dump.htm" title="web.cern.ch">http://lhc-machine-outreach.web.cern.ch/lhc-machine-outreach/components/beam-dump.htm</a> [web.cern.ch]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is what happens http : //lhc-machine-outreach.web.cern.ch/lhc-machine-outreach/components/beam-dump.htm [ web.cern.ch ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is what happens http://lhc-machine-outreach.web.cern.ch/lhc-machine-outreach/components/beam-dump.htm [web.cern.ch]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172578</id>
	<title>Re:Physician, not physicist</title>
	<author>stewhites</author>
	<datestamp>1265050680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Damnit Jim, i'm a doctor, not an engineer!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Damnit Jim , i 'm a doctor , not an engineer !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damnit Jim, i'm a doctor, not an engineer!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31193168</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266497040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> For a "realistic" trip to nearby stars, that means an extra day and a half out of the 4.37 years to get to Alpha Centauri</p></div></blockquote><p>Only when measured on a clock/calendar that is not experiencing acceleration and is at rest with respect to the two stars.   An Earth-based observer, despite experiencing accelerations and not being at rest, is a good approximation (her clock will run a few milliseconds a day slow compared to the idealized observer).</p><p>However, the people inside the ship experience what they perceive as a Lorentz contraction of the distance to their destination.   The distance is exponentially shortened as the relativistic speed limit is approached.   The effect of this is that measuring by their own shipboard clocks the trip would take a lot less time at 0.99999998c than 0.99c.   (The people on Earth and in orbit around Alpha Centauri would still think the rocket trip takes about 4.37 years, although the Earth observer would not know this until twice that time had elapsed).   These observers would consider the clocks onboard the relativistic spaceship to have experienced a Lorentz time dilation, and also the ship itself (and any rulers onboard) would be length contracted.</p><p>A special relativity treatment of this using the Lorentz-Fitzgerald formula is here:  <a href="http://www.fourmilab.ch/cship/lorentz.html" title="fourmilab.ch" rel="nofollow">http://www.fourmilab.ch/cship/lorentz.html</a> [fourmilab.ch]  which is entirely accurate if you ignore accelerations experienced by the spacecraft.</p><p>Unfortunately for a classical object with the mass of a spaceship general relativistic effects become harder to ignore as one approaches c, since the increasing mass-energy-momentum nontrivially influences the stress and pressure terms in the Einstein stress-energy tensor, which alters not only the geodesics of nearby classical objects (i.e., the high mass-energy causes the fast ship to develop a strong gravitational field) but also slows its onboard clocks (relative to the Earth and Alpha Centauri observers' clocks) too (and also shortens onboard rulers from those observers' perspectives too).    That's OK, it makes the trip even shorter, but it also creates a rather nasty gravitational potential gradient that rapidly becomes unignorable at scales less than the size of the ship (so it would probably rip apart tidally).   Also, any infalling objects would develop energy through gravitational time dilation (i.e., infalling photons blueshift, infalling electrons gain kinetic energy, etc.).</p><p>In short:</p><p>SR: high relative velocity -&gt; length contraction<br>GR: high acceleration and high momentum -&gt; length contraction</p><p>length contraction ~ time dilation (shorter trip, but also increases in frequencies of incoming particles and ensembles (i.e., incoming cold things are measured as hotter as you experience Lorentz contraction))</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For a " realistic " trip to nearby stars , that means an extra day and a half out of the 4.37 years to get to Alpha CentauriOnly when measured on a clock/calendar that is not experiencing acceleration and is at rest with respect to the two stars .
An Earth-based observer , despite experiencing accelerations and not being at rest , is a good approximation ( her clock will run a few milliseconds a day slow compared to the idealized observer ) .However , the people inside the ship experience what they perceive as a Lorentz contraction of the distance to their destination .
The distance is exponentially shortened as the relativistic speed limit is approached .
The effect of this is that measuring by their own shipboard clocks the trip would take a lot less time at 0.99999998c than 0.99c .
( The people on Earth and in orbit around Alpha Centauri would still think the rocket trip takes about 4.37 years , although the Earth observer would not know this until twice that time had elapsed ) .
These observers would consider the clocks onboard the relativistic spaceship to have experienced a Lorentz time dilation , and also the ship itself ( and any rulers onboard ) would be length contracted.A special relativity treatment of this using the Lorentz-Fitzgerald formula is here : http : //www.fourmilab.ch/cship/lorentz.html [ fourmilab.ch ] which is entirely accurate if you ignore accelerations experienced by the spacecraft.Unfortunately for a classical object with the mass of a spaceship general relativistic effects become harder to ignore as one approaches c , since the increasing mass-energy-momentum nontrivially influences the stress and pressure terms in the Einstein stress-energy tensor , which alters not only the geodesics of nearby classical objects ( i.e. , the high mass-energy causes the fast ship to develop a strong gravitational field ) but also slows its onboard clocks ( relative to the Earth and Alpha Centauri observers ' clocks ) too ( and also shortens onboard rulers from those observers ' perspectives too ) .
That 's OK , it makes the trip even shorter , but it also creates a rather nasty gravitational potential gradient that rapidly becomes unignorable at scales less than the size of the ship ( so it would probably rip apart tidally ) .
Also , any infalling objects would develop energy through gravitational time dilation ( i.e. , infalling photons blueshift , infalling electrons gain kinetic energy , etc .
) .In short : SR : high relative velocity - &gt; length contractionGR : high acceleration and high momentum - &gt; length contractionlength contraction ~ time dilation ( shorter trip , but also increases in frequencies of incoming particles and ensembles ( i.e. , incoming cold things are measured as hotter as you experience Lorentz contraction ) )</tokentext>
<sentencetext> For a "realistic" trip to nearby stars, that means an extra day and a half out of the 4.37 years to get to Alpha CentauriOnly when measured on a clock/calendar that is not experiencing acceleration and is at rest with respect to the two stars.
An Earth-based observer, despite experiencing accelerations and not being at rest, is a good approximation (her clock will run a few milliseconds a day slow compared to the idealized observer).However, the people inside the ship experience what they perceive as a Lorentz contraction of the distance to their destination.
The distance is exponentially shortened as the relativistic speed limit is approached.
The effect of this is that measuring by their own shipboard clocks the trip would take a lot less time at 0.99999998c than 0.99c.
(The people on Earth and in orbit around Alpha Centauri would still think the rocket trip takes about 4.37 years, although the Earth observer would not know this until twice that time had elapsed).
These observers would consider the clocks onboard the relativistic spaceship to have experienced a Lorentz time dilation, and also the ship itself (and any rulers onboard) would be length contracted.A special relativity treatment of this using the Lorentz-Fitzgerald formula is here:  http://www.fourmilab.ch/cship/lorentz.html [fourmilab.ch]  which is entirely accurate if you ignore accelerations experienced by the spacecraft.Unfortunately for a classical object with the mass of a spaceship general relativistic effects become harder to ignore as one approaches c, since the increasing mass-energy-momentum nontrivially influences the stress and pressure terms in the Einstein stress-energy tensor, which alters not only the geodesics of nearby classical objects (i.e., the high mass-energy causes the fast ship to develop a strong gravitational field) but also slows its onboard clocks (relative to the Earth and Alpha Centauri observers' clocks) too (and also shortens onboard rulers from those observers' perspectives too).
That's OK, it makes the trip even shorter, but it also creates a rather nasty gravitational potential gradient that rapidly becomes unignorable at scales less than the size of the ship (so it would probably rip apart tidally).
Also, any infalling objects would develop energy through gravitational time dilation (i.e., infalling photons blueshift, infalling electrons gain kinetic energy, etc.
).In short:SR: high relative velocity -&gt; length contractionGR: high acceleration and high momentum -&gt; length contractionlength contraction ~ time dilation (shorter trip, but also increases in frequencies of incoming particles and ensembles (i.e., incoming cold things are measured as hotter as you experience Lorentz contraction))
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31180622</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>TangoMargarine</author>
	<datestamp>1265049180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So obviously an inertial damper will need to be developed, too. For comparison, the highest application of g forces that anyone has survived was <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John\_Paul\_Stapp" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">~45g.</a> [wikipedia.org] (Was there some story about somebody who fell out of an airliner at altitude and survived?)</htmltext>
<tokenext>So obviously an inertial damper will need to be developed , too .
For comparison , the highest application of g forces that anyone has survived was ~ 45g .
[ wikipedia.org ] ( Was there some story about somebody who fell out of an airliner at altitude and survived ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So obviously an inertial damper will need to be developed, too.
For comparison, the highest application of g forces that anyone has survived was ~45g.
[wikipedia.org] (Was there some story about somebody who fell out of an airliner at altitude and survived?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31180292</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265045160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Try to imagine yourself in the Cretaceous Period. You get your first look at this "six foot turkey" as you enter a clearing. He moves like a bird, lightly, bobbing his head. And you keep still because you think that maybe his visual acuity is based on movement like T-Rex - he'll lose you if you don't move. But no, not Velociraptor. You stare at him, and he just stares right back. And that's when the attack comes. Not from the front, but from the side, *whoosh* from the other two 'raptors you didn't even know were there. Because Velociraptor's a pack hunter, you see, he uses coordinated attack patterns and he is out in force today. And he slashes at you with this... a six-inch retractable claw, like a razor, on the the middle toe. He doesn't bother to bite your jugular like a lion, say... no no. He slashes at you here... or here... or maybe across the belly, spilling your intestines. The point is... you are alive when they start to eat you. So you know... wipe out all life on the planet and set up an Oort cloud to isolate them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Try to imagine yourself in the Cretaceous Period .
You get your first look at this " six foot turkey " as you enter a clearing .
He moves like a bird , lightly , bobbing his head .
And you keep still because you think that maybe his visual acuity is based on movement like T-Rex - he 'll lose you if you do n't move .
But no , not Velociraptor .
You stare at him , and he just stares right back .
And that 's when the attack comes .
Not from the front , but from the side , * whoosh * from the other two 'raptors you did n't even know were there .
Because Velociraptor 's a pack hunter , you see , he uses coordinated attack patterns and he is out in force today .
And he slashes at you with this... a six-inch retractable claw , like a razor , on the the middle toe .
He does n't bother to bite your jugular like a lion , say... no no .
He slashes at you here... or here... or maybe across the belly , spilling your intestines .
The point is... you are alive when they start to eat you .
So you know... wipe out all life on the planet and set up an Oort cloud to isolate them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try to imagine yourself in the Cretaceous Period.
You get your first look at this "six foot turkey" as you enter a clearing.
He moves like a bird, lightly, bobbing his head.
And you keep still because you think that maybe his visual acuity is based on movement like T-Rex - he'll lose you if you don't move.
But no, not Velociraptor.
You stare at him, and he just stares right back.
And that's when the attack comes.
Not from the front, but from the side, *whoosh* from the other two 'raptors you didn't even know were there.
Because Velociraptor's a pack hunter, you see, he uses coordinated attack patterns and he is out in force today.
And he slashes at you with this... a six-inch retractable claw, like a razor, on the the middle toe.
He doesn't bother to bite your jugular like a lion, say... no no.
He slashes at you here... or here... or maybe across the belly, spilling your intestines.
The point is... you are alive when they start to eat you.
So you know... wipe out all life on the planet and set up an Oort cloud to isolate them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172892</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265051520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system, and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period."</p><p>Someone has to be the first to evolve. Maybe it's us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system , and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period .
" Someone has to be the first to evolve .
Maybe it 's us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system, and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period.
"Someone has to be the first to evolve.
Maybe it's us.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31177142</id>
	<title>Am I missing something?</title>
	<author>bjorniac</author>
	<datestamp>1265023320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So someone does a Lorentz transformation on the denisty of interstellar hydrogen, ramps up the veloicty until he gets the relativistic energy to be that of the LHC and somehow this is news?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So someone does a Lorentz transformation on the denisty of interstellar hydrogen , ramps up the veloicty until he gets the relativistic energy to be that of the LHC and somehow this is news ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So someone does a Lorentz transformation on the denisty of interstellar hydrogen, ramps up the veloicty until he gets the relativistic energy to be that of the LHC and somehow this is news?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171622</id>
	<title>Re:7 teraelectron volts?</title>
	<author>BadAnalogyGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1265047860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not the voltage, it's the amperage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not the voltage , it 's the amperage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not the voltage, it's the amperage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31179924</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265041620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I was traveling at 99.9\% the speed of light, I could have First Post on Slashdot every time, but to observers, the forum would be closed before it ever showed up!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I was traveling at 99.9 \ % the speed of light , I could have First Post on Slashdot every time , but to observers , the forum would be closed before it ever showed up ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I was traveling at 99.9\% the speed of light, I could have First Post on Slashdot every time, but to observers, the forum would be closed before it ever showed up!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175654</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>osu-neko</author>
	<datestamp>1265017620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Well, if you change the variables a little, it could take longer.</p></div><p>Not significantly longer, geologically speaking.  It's an exponential thing.  Like the man who asks for one grain of rice the first day, two the second day, four the third day, etc.  Change that to weeks, or months, or years, or centuries, and it takes longer for it to equal the entire agriculture output of the empire, but the difference in time isn't significant when talking in the timescale of geological eras, because the exponential nature of the function eventually overwhelms the lengthy delays in getting the ball rolling.  If you don't fiddle the variables to the point that it takes any planet a geological age to produce its first colony, the entire galaxy ends up colonized in a timescale smaller than a geological age.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , if you change the variables a little , it could take longer.Not significantly longer , geologically speaking .
It 's an exponential thing .
Like the man who asks for one grain of rice the first day , two the second day , four the third day , etc .
Change that to weeks , or months , or years , or centuries , and it takes longer for it to equal the entire agriculture output of the empire , but the difference in time is n't significant when talking in the timescale of geological eras , because the exponential nature of the function eventually overwhelms the lengthy delays in getting the ball rolling .
If you do n't fiddle the variables to the point that it takes any planet a geological age to produce its first colony , the entire galaxy ends up colonized in a timescale smaller than a geological age .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, if you change the variables a little, it could take longer.Not significantly longer, geologically speaking.
It's an exponential thing.
Like the man who asks for one grain of rice the first day, two the second day, four the third day, etc.
Change that to weeks, or months, or years, or centuries, and it takes longer for it to equal the entire agriculture output of the empire, but the difference in time isn't significant when talking in the timescale of geological eras, because the exponential nature of the function eventually overwhelms the lengthy delays in getting the ball rolling.
If you don't fiddle the variables to the point that it takes any planet a geological age to produce its first colony, the entire galaxy ends up colonized in a timescale smaller than a geological age.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171456</id>
	<title>Re:What would happen?</title>
	<author>confused one</author>
	<datestamp>1265047320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It would burn a tiny hole in you; but, that wouldn't matter because the radiation flux would kill you within seconds.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It would burn a tiny hole in you ; but , that would n't matter because the radiation flux would kill you within seconds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would burn a tiny hole in you; but, that wouldn't matter because the radiation flux would kill you within seconds.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172688</id>
	<title>Re:old news...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265050980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><b>&gt;As the spaceship reached 99.999998 per cent of the speed of light, "hydrogen atoms would seem to reach a staggering 7 teraelectron volts," which for the crew "would be like standing in front of the Large Hadron Collider beam</b> <p>...</p><p>
Since most of the time the LHC is down that doesn't seem like a big problem<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-p</p><p>Ok, big fan of the LHC, but just had to say it</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; As the spaceship reached 99.999998 per cent of the speed of light , " hydrogen atoms would seem to reach a staggering 7 teraelectron volts , " which for the crew " would be like standing in front of the Large Hadron Collider beam .. . Since most of the time the LHC is down that does n't seem like a big problem : -pOk , big fan of the LHC , but just had to say it</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;As the spaceship reached 99.999998 per cent of the speed of light, "hydrogen atoms would seem to reach a staggering 7 teraelectron volts," which for the crew "would be like standing in front of the Large Hadron Collider beam ...
Since most of the time the LHC is down that doesn't seem like a big problem :-pOk, big fan of the LHC, but just had to say it</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175904</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>bondsbw</author>
	<datestamp>1265018400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We look for things, things that make us go.  Do not try to trick us. We can tell.</p><p>* Beholds the Crimson Forcefield *</p><p>They are strong now...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We look for things , things that make us go .
Do not try to trick us .
We can tell .
* Beholds the Crimson Forcefield * They are strong now.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We look for things, things that make us go.
Do not try to trick us.
We can tell.
* Beholds the Crimson Forcefield *They are strong now...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171632</id>
	<title>Re:Considering the energy required. . .</title>
	<author>delt0r</author>
	<datestamp>1265047920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Some numbers! If the ship is just 100kg with cargo, then you need 6.36e22 J to get to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.99999998c assuming 100\% efficiency. About 1.4e21 J  hits earth everyday from the sun. So a earth sized solar panel will collected the energy required in about 4 and half days. All assuming no energy losses.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some numbers !
If the ship is just 100kg with cargo , then you need 6.36e22 J to get to .99999998c assuming 100 \ % efficiency .
About 1.4e21 J hits earth everyday from the sun .
So a earth sized solar panel will collected the energy required in about 4 and half days .
All assuming no energy losses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some numbers!
If the ship is just 100kg with cargo, then you need 6.36e22 J to get to .99999998c assuming 100\% efficiency.
About 1.4e21 J  hits earth everyday from the sun.
So a earth sized solar panel will collected the energy required in about 4 and half days.
All assuming no energy losses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173270</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>Shompol</author>
	<datestamp>1265052720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You know, finding a way to India across Atlantic was an opera only a few hundred years ago, especially given the dangers of falling off the edge of the Earth.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , finding a way to India across Atlantic was an opera only a few hundred years ago , especially given the dangers of falling off the edge of the Earth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, finding a way to India across Atlantic was an opera only a few hundred years ago, especially given the dangers of falling off the edge of the Earth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170982</id>
	<title>Workaround!</title>
	<author>slushdork</author>
	<datestamp>1265046000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have a cunning plan to work around this problem: only travel at 99.99999<b>7</b>\% of the speed of light!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a cunning plan to work around this problem : only travel at 99.999997 \ % of the speed of light !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a cunning plan to work around this problem: only travel at 99.999997\% of the speed of light!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174112</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265055600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I propose we build a giant space ship with sufficient mass that it has enought gravitational force to retain it's own atmosphere, then put it in orbit around a fast moving star swinging around the edge of a roaming galaxy, then just hitch-hike our way through the universe.  We could have the entire human race ride on it and in only a few generations you can only imagine how much of the universe we could cover!</p><p>I do recommend putting a smaller space craft in orbit around the larger one to provide recreational space travel during the long trip.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I propose we build a giant space ship with sufficient mass that it has enought gravitational force to retain it 's own atmosphere , then put it in orbit around a fast moving star swinging around the edge of a roaming galaxy , then just hitch-hike our way through the universe .
We could have the entire human race ride on it and in only a few generations you can only imagine how much of the universe we could cover ! I do recommend putting a smaller space craft in orbit around the larger one to provide recreational space travel during the long trip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I propose we build a giant space ship with sufficient mass that it has enought gravitational force to retain it's own atmosphere, then put it in orbit around a fast moving star swinging around the edge of a roaming galaxy, then just hitch-hike our way through the universe.
We could have the entire human race ride on it and in only a few generations you can only imagine how much of the universe we could cover!I do recommend putting a smaller space craft in orbit around the larger one to provide recreational space travel during the long trip.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174036</id>
	<title>FAIL</title>
	<author>rpresser</author>
	<datestamp>1265055360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Star trek: first proposed 1960; first on screen, 1966<br>Alcubierre "warp drive" paper: 1994</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Star trek : first proposed 1960 ; first on screen , 1966Alcubierre " warp drive " paper : 1994</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Star trek: first proposed 1960; first on screen, 1966Alcubierre "warp drive" paper: 1994</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172628</id>
	<title>Aluminum hull.. uh, DUH.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265050860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Edelstein "calculates that a 10-centimetre-thick layer of aluminium would absorb less than 1 per cent of the energy", and the intense doses of radiation would damage the ship's structure and fry its electronics."</p><p>Stupid man, thats why they use duranium hull plating with a structural integrity field, and have deflectors!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Edelstein " calculates that a 10-centimetre-thick layer of aluminium would absorb less than 1 per cent of the energy " , and the intense doses of radiation would damage the ship 's structure and fry its electronics .
" Stupid man , thats why they use duranium hull plating with a structural integrity field , and have deflectors !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Edelstein "calculates that a 10-centimetre-thick layer of aluminium would absorb less than 1 per cent of the energy", and the intense doses of radiation would damage the ship's structure and fry its electronics.
"Stupid man, thats why they use duranium hull plating with a structural integrity field, and have deflectors!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172204</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>Dr.Syshalt</author>
	<datestamp>1265049540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Oh &mdash; and the Fermi Paradox applies especially well. Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system, and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period.</p></div><p>There is no sign that it hasn't been colonized at some point either - we just don't know. Civilizations rise and die, their parts unite and then they fall into pieces. We, humans, could be remnants of some ancient aliens colony too.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh    and the Fermi Paradox applies especially well .
Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system , and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period.There is no sign that it has n't been colonized at some point either - we just do n't know .
Civilizations rise and die , their parts unite and then they fall into pieces .
We , humans , could be remnants of some ancient aliens colony too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh — and the Fermi Paradox applies especially well.
Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system, and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period.There is no sign that it hasn't been colonized at some point either - we just don't know.
Civilizations rise and die, their parts unite and then they fall into pieces.
We, humans, could be remnants of some ancient aliens colony too.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173560</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265053800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Not to mention the Bussard Collectors.</i></p><p>How can I get a job taking items from the 80's ST:TNG technical manual, figuring out why they're there, and then publishing a press release stating X is impossible because of it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to mention the Bussard Collectors.How can I get a job taking items from the 80 's ST : TNG technical manual , figuring out why they 're there , and then publishing a press release stating X is impossible because of it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to mention the Bussard Collectors.How can I get a job taking items from the 80's ST:TNG technical manual, figuring out why they're there, and then publishing a press release stating X is impossible because of it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174446</id>
	<title>Take that, sci-fi debunkers!</title>
	<author>Tetsujin</author>
	<datestamp>1265056800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of those classic complaints against popular sci-fi is that the ships are always pretty and "aerodynamic" (well, mostly, anyway) and that there's no need for this in a vacuum...  Well, there you go, one good reason to have aerodynamic space ships.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Making spaceships sleek was a key part of making them fast in the Lensman books for more or less the same reason.  (Smith's goofy FTL drive idea negated the mass of the ship, allowing the ship to instantly accelerate to a speed where thrust equaled drag)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of those classic complaints against popular sci-fi is that the ships are always pretty and " aerodynamic " ( well , mostly , anyway ) and that there 's no need for this in a vacuum... Well , there you go , one good reason to have aerodynamic space ships .
: ) Making spaceships sleek was a key part of making them fast in the Lensman books for more or less the same reason .
( Smith 's goofy FTL drive idea negated the mass of the ship , allowing the ship to instantly accelerate to a speed where thrust equaled drag )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of those classic complaints against popular sci-fi is that the ships are always pretty and "aerodynamic" (well, mostly, anyway) and that there's no need for this in a vacuum...  Well, there you go, one good reason to have aerodynamic space ships.
:)Making spaceships sleek was a key part of making them fast in the Lensman books for more or less the same reason.
(Smith's goofy FTL drive idea negated the mass of the ship, allowing the ship to instantly accelerate to a speed where thrust equaled drag)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176848</id>
	<title>Re:Considering the energy required. . .</title>
	<author>coaxial</author>
	<datestamp>1265022060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>providing sufficient shielding should be a trivial exercise in additional hand-wavium. . .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.</p></div><p>Hand-wavium incidentally is central to the plot of Avatar 2.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>providing sufficient shielding should be a trivial exercise in additional hand-wavium .
. .
.Hand-wavium incidentally is central to the plot of Avatar 2 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>providing sufficient shielding should be a trivial exercise in additional hand-wavium.
. .
.Hand-wavium incidentally is central to the plot of Avatar 2.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171284</id>
	<title>All that says is that we can't hit lightspeed...</title>
	<author>VShael</author>
	<datestamp>1265046900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>through the medium of interstellar space.</p><p>I'm pretty sure I can't travel at 30,000 mph through the ocean either. Through space, not as big a problem.</p><p>Most SF geeks would agree that if we're ever going to exceed C, we won't be doing it in meatspace.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>through the medium of interstellar space.I 'm pretty sure I ca n't travel at 30,000 mph through the ocean either .
Through space , not as big a problem.Most SF geeks would agree that if we 're ever going to exceed C , we wo n't be doing it in meatspace .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>through the medium of interstellar space.I'm pretty sure I can't travel at 30,000 mph through the ocean either.
Through space, not as big a problem.Most SF geeks would agree that if we're ever going to exceed C, we won't be doing it in meatspace.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173618</id>
	<title>Re:Considering the energy required. . .</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265053980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And if we absorb all the energy from the sun striking the Earth we'll also erase global warming! YAY!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And if we absorb all the energy from the sun striking the Earth we 'll also erase global warming !
YAY !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if we absorb all the energy from the sun striking the Earth we'll also erase global warming!
YAY!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178732</id>
	<title>Re:I said this two years ago in a Slashdot comment</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265031420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I said this two years ago in a Slashdot comment</p></div><p>Really? Sorry I wasn't paying attention. I'll try and remember this time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I said this two years ago in a Slashdot commentReally ?
Sorry I was n't paying attention .
I 'll try and remember this time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I said this two years ago in a Slashdot commentReally?
Sorry I wasn't paying attention.
I'll try and remember this time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31200122</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1266599160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is an AMERICAN researcher.  We routinely drive 5-mile trips at 80MPH in a 55MPH zone even though it will save, at most, less than a minute of actual drive time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is an AMERICAN researcher .
We routinely drive 5-mile trips at 80MPH in a 55MPH zone even though it will save , at most , less than a minute of actual drive time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is an AMERICAN researcher.
We routinely drive 5-mile trips at 80MPH in a 55MPH zone even though it will save, at most, less than a minute of actual drive time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171068</id>
	<title>HAHA SHIELDS</title>
	<author>wtbname</author>
	<datestamp>1265046300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HAH Noobs thats what the NAVIGATION SHI... aww damnit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HAH Noobs thats what the NAVIGATION SHI... aww damnit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HAH Noobs thats what the NAVIGATION SHI... aww damnit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176654</id>
	<title>Re:old news...</title>
	<author>Marxist Hacker 42</author>
	<datestamp>1265021340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But at that energy level, has anybody thought that perhaps instead of a problem, this might actually be the *solution* to FTL travel- an adaptation of ramjet tech, compressing the incoming hydrogen (and whatever other matter happens to be there) and incinerating it into a much faster outgoing stream?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But at that energy level , has anybody thought that perhaps instead of a problem , this might actually be the * solution * to FTL travel- an adaptation of ramjet tech , compressing the incoming hydrogen ( and whatever other matter happens to be there ) and incinerating it into a much faster outgoing stream ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But at that energy level, has anybody thought that perhaps instead of a problem, this might actually be the *solution* to FTL travel- an adaptation of ramjet tech, compressing the incoming hydrogen (and whatever other matter happens to be there) and incinerating it into a much faster outgoing stream?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171328</id>
	<title>Re:What would happen?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265047020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The could take a nice proton-ray picture of you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The could take a nice proton-ray picture of you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The could take a nice proton-ray picture of you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171370</id>
	<title>Re:easy solution</title>
	<author>oldspewey</author>
	<datestamp>1265047080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Somebody set up us the atom bomb.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Somebody set up us the atom bomb .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somebody set up us the atom bomb.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170962</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172728</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265051100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Simon says we have have faster-than-light space travel. Awesome!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Simon says we have have faster-than-light space travel .
Awesome !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simon says we have have faster-than-light space travel.
Awesome!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173050</id>
	<title>I said this two years ago in a Slashdot comment</title>
	<author>InterGuru</author>
	<datestamp>1265052000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=177080&amp;cid=14696574" title="slashdot.org">http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=177080&amp;cid=14696574</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p>The density of interstellar space is about one atom per cubic centimeter [hypertextbook.com]. If the spaceship were going near the speed of light (3 x 10^10 cm/sec), it would be hit by 3 x 10^10 relativistic particles per cm^2/sec. This is about the equivalent of one Curie [wikipedia.org] per cm^2, which would kill a human and cripple any electronics on board</p><p>A very heavy magnet could deflect the protons, but the neutral atoms would be unaffected by the magnetic field.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //science.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 177080&amp;cid = 14696574 [ slashdot.org ] The density of interstellar space is about one atom per cubic centimeter [ hypertextbook.com ] .
If the spaceship were going near the speed of light ( 3 x 10 ^ 10 cm/sec ) , it would be hit by 3 x 10 ^ 10 relativistic particles per cm ^ 2/sec .
This is about the equivalent of one Curie [ wikipedia.org ] per cm ^ 2 , which would kill a human and cripple any electronics on boardA very heavy magnet could deflect the protons , but the neutral atoms would be unaffected by the magnetic field .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=177080&amp;cid=14696574 [slashdot.org]The density of interstellar space is about one atom per cubic centimeter [hypertextbook.com].
If the spaceship were going near the speed of light (3 x 10^10 cm/sec), it would be hit by 3 x 10^10 relativistic particles per cm^2/sec.
This is about the equivalent of one Curie [wikipedia.org] per cm^2, which would kill a human and cripple any electronics on boardA very heavy magnet could deflect the protons, but the neutral atoms would be unaffected by the magnetic field.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172714</id>
	<title>Improbability Drive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265051040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Our problem is we are focusing in on velocity, not probability!</p><p>What we really need to do is perfect our modelling systems for the Infinite Improbability Drive, which is powered by Brownian Motion</p><p>Then all you have to do is calculate the exact (im)probability of appearing spontaneously in the destination (everything has a non-zero probability, some just smaller than others), then plug that probability into the Drive, and whammo!  The drive generates the requisitite amount of improbability, which thus generates the action desired.</p><p>Oh course, if your math is off you're in trouble.  If you get a decimal point wrong, you may cause the ship to turn into a gigantic whale.</p><p>Now if I could just remember the best source for Brownian Motion to use as a fuel...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Our problem is we are focusing in on velocity , not probability ! What we really need to do is perfect our modelling systems for the Infinite Improbability Drive , which is powered by Brownian MotionThen all you have to do is calculate the exact ( im ) probability of appearing spontaneously in the destination ( everything has a non-zero probability , some just smaller than others ) , then plug that probability into the Drive , and whammo !
The drive generates the requisitite amount of improbability , which thus generates the action desired.Oh course , if your math is off you 're in trouble .
If you get a decimal point wrong , you may cause the ship to turn into a gigantic whale.Now if I could just remember the best source for Brownian Motion to use as a fuel.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our problem is we are focusing in on velocity, not probability!What we really need to do is perfect our modelling systems for the Infinite Improbability Drive, which is powered by Brownian MotionThen all you have to do is calculate the exact (im)probability of appearing spontaneously in the destination (everything has a non-zero probability, some just smaller than others), then plug that probability into the Drive, and whammo!
The drive generates the requisitite amount of improbability, which thus generates the action desired.Oh course, if your math is off you're in trouble.
If you get a decimal point wrong, you may cause the ship to turn into a gigantic whale.Now if I could just remember the best source for Brownian Motion to use as a fuel...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171290</id>
	<title>Slight difference in density</title>
	<author>AJWM</author>
	<datestamp>1265046900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The protons in the LHC are a little closer together than those in interstellar space.  Density in interstellar space is about 1 atom per cubic centimeter.  I can't readily find a number for the cross-sectional area of the LHC beam, but it is surely less than 1 cm^2 and each ring has 2835 x 10^11 protons over its 27 km length -- or better than 10^8 protons per cubic centimeter.</p><p>So no, it's not quite like standing in front of the beam from the LHC, not by a factor of a hundred million.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The protons in the LHC are a little closer together than those in interstellar space .
Density in interstellar space is about 1 atom per cubic centimeter .
I ca n't readily find a number for the cross-sectional area of the LHC beam , but it is surely less than 1 cm ^ 2 and each ring has 2835 x 10 ^ 11 protons over its 27 km length -- or better than 10 ^ 8 protons per cubic centimeter.So no , it 's not quite like standing in front of the beam from the LHC , not by a factor of a hundred million .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The protons in the LHC are a little closer together than those in interstellar space.
Density in interstellar space is about 1 atom per cubic centimeter.
I can't readily find a number for the cross-sectional area of the LHC beam, but it is surely less than 1 cm^2 and each ring has 2835 x 10^11 protons over its 27 km length -- or better than 10^8 protons per cubic centimeter.So no, it's not quite like standing in front of the beam from the LHC, not by a factor of a hundred million.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172532</id>
	<title>Perspective</title>
	<author>AlpineR</author>
	<datestamp>1265050560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do not try to dodge the atoms - that's impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth: there are no atoms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do not try to dodge the atoms - that 's impossible .
Instead , only try to realize the truth : there are no atoms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do not try to dodge the atoms - that's impossible.
Instead, only try to realize the truth: there are no atoms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170962</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171004</id>
	<title>True, But Irrelevant...</title>
	<author>wintermute3</author>
	<datestamp>1265046060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think anyone seriously contemplating relativistic or FTL travel expects to be physically accelerated to such speeds.  After all, if stationary interstellar hydrogen is effectively hitting you at teravolt levels, it means that every particle in your body (and the ship) has actually been accelerated to velocities equivalent to the particles in the LHC beam.  Not bloody likely.  We need warp drive, subspace, wormholes, or something else to solve the problem, not ridiculous conventional acceleration.</p><p>- Michael</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think anyone seriously contemplating relativistic or FTL travel expects to be physically accelerated to such speeds .
After all , if stationary interstellar hydrogen is effectively hitting you at teravolt levels , it means that every particle in your body ( and the ship ) has actually been accelerated to velocities equivalent to the particles in the LHC beam .
Not bloody likely .
We need warp drive , subspace , wormholes , or something else to solve the problem , not ridiculous conventional acceleration.- Michael</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think anyone seriously contemplating relativistic or FTL travel expects to be physically accelerated to such speeds.
After all, if stationary interstellar hydrogen is effectively hitting you at teravolt levels, it means that every particle in your body (and the ship) has actually been accelerated to velocities equivalent to the particles in the LHC beam.
Not bloody likely.
We need warp drive, subspace, wormholes, or something else to solve the problem, not ridiculous conventional acceleration.- Michael</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171528</id>
	<title>Re:Lightspeed is so 1960's.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265047560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the ARTICLE meant STUPIDITY (Score:?=sorry to bro)<br>by myspace-cn (1094627)</p><p>Come on, some of you remember.</p><p>the two most common elements in the universe?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the ARTICLE meant STUPIDITY ( Score : ? = sorry to bro ) by myspace-cn ( 1094627 ) Come on , some of you remember.the two most common elements in the universe ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the ARTICLE meant STUPIDITY (Score:?=sorry to bro)by myspace-cn (1094627)Come on, some of you remember.the two most common elements in the universe?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171062</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>jgtg32a</author>
	<datestamp>1265046240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You did not just link me to a astrophysics article of wiki that's worse than tv tropes for me<br>
&nbsp; <br>I'm at 8 articles from just the first link you provided.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You did not just link me to a astrophysics article of wiki that 's worse than tv tropes for me   I 'm at 8 articles from just the first link you provided .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You did not just link me to a astrophysics article of wiki that's worse than tv tropes for me
  I'm at 8 articles from just the first link you provided.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175012</id>
	<title>Re:Fascinating limitation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265015580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Half your reaction mass being antimater would be incredibly inefficient.<br>You want to use the energy released by mixing your matter and antimatter to throw more matter out the back of the ship.<br>You are otherwise just shining a very bright gamma ray torch into space.</p><p>You could even use the hydrogen you have just been scooping up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Half your reaction mass being antimater would be incredibly inefficient.You want to use the energy released by mixing your matter and antimatter to throw more matter out the back of the ship.You are otherwise just shining a very bright gamma ray torch into space.You could even use the hydrogen you have just been scooping up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Half your reaction mass being antimater would be incredibly inefficient.You want to use the energy released by mixing your matter and antimatter to throw more matter out the back of the ship.You are otherwise just shining a very bright gamma ray torch into space.You could even use the hydrogen you have just been scooping up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171170</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173322</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>Angst Badger</author>
	<datestamp>1265052960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For relatively local trips, the difference amounts to a triviality</p></div><p>For relatively local trips, especially considering that you have to spend half the trip turned around and decelerating, there's going to be a point <i>well</i> before nine-tenths of C that the cost of further acceleration vastly outweighs the value of getting to the destination faster. Without knowing what the cost of energy is going to be if and when we can build propulsion systems capable of relativistic travel, I couldn't say where the point of diminishing returns would be, but for in-system travel, I'd be willing to bet it's not even an appreciable fraction of C.</p><p>Besides, it's a long, hard slog to Vland.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For relatively local trips , the difference amounts to a trivialityFor relatively local trips , especially considering that you have to spend half the trip turned around and decelerating , there 's going to be a point well before nine-tenths of C that the cost of further acceleration vastly outweighs the value of getting to the destination faster .
Without knowing what the cost of energy is going to be if and when we can build propulsion systems capable of relativistic travel , I could n't say where the point of diminishing returns would be , but for in-system travel , I 'd be willing to bet it 's not even an appreciable fraction of C.Besides , it 's a long , hard slog to Vland .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For relatively local trips, the difference amounts to a trivialityFor relatively local trips, especially considering that you have to spend half the trip turned around and decelerating, there's going to be a point well before nine-tenths of C that the cost of further acceleration vastly outweighs the value of getting to the destination faster.
Without knowing what the cost of energy is going to be if and when we can build propulsion systems capable of relativistic travel, I couldn't say where the point of diminishing returns would be, but for in-system travel, I'd be willing to bet it's not even an appreciable fraction of C.Besides, it's a long, hard slog to Vland.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31180696</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>Clovert Agent</author>
	<datestamp>1265050020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Alastair Reynolds is a very good sci-fi author and a qualified astronomer. He dealt with the question of near-light speed and FTL travel in various ways in various books.</p><p>Worth a read, and hopefully after that you'd be a bit less keen to dismiss the entire community of sci-fi authors as clueless amateurs. There are some very good "hard" SF writers. Their science is still fiction, but at least it makes an effort to remain grounded in what today's science can offer or predict.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Alastair Reynolds is a very good sci-fi author and a qualified astronomer .
He dealt with the question of near-light speed and FTL travel in various ways in various books.Worth a read , and hopefully after that you 'd be a bit less keen to dismiss the entire community of sci-fi authors as clueless amateurs .
There are some very good " hard " SF writers .
Their science is still fiction , but at least it makes an effort to remain grounded in what today 's science can offer or predict .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Alastair Reynolds is a very good sci-fi author and a qualified astronomer.
He dealt with the question of near-light speed and FTL travel in various ways in various books.Worth a read, and hopefully after that you'd be a bit less keen to dismiss the entire community of sci-fi authors as clueless amateurs.
There are some very good "hard" SF writers.
Their science is still fiction, but at least it makes an effort to remain grounded in what today's science can offer or predict.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171244</id>
	<title>This is a problem?!?</title>
	<author>wbav</author>
	<datestamp>1265046720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It seems like this would be a solution to a problem, mainly power.

Granted, it is power already spent by the ship, but is there any reason why it couldn't be shunted back into the system?  It seems that it would mitigate the problem of power requirements for FLT.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems like this would be a solution to a problem , mainly power .
Granted , it is power already spent by the ship , but is there any reason why it could n't be shunted back into the system ?
It seems that it would mitigate the problem of power requirements for FLT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems like this would be a solution to a problem, mainly power.
Granted, it is power already spent by the ship, but is there any reason why it couldn't be shunted back into the system?
It seems that it would mitigate the problem of power requirements for FLT.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172792</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>Mr Chulito</author>
	<datestamp>1265051220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Please ignore my ignorance but can't we use this to our advantage?.... if this hydro is creating so many volts, why can't we find a way to just harvest it? and use it for the propulsion systems at the same time giving us more power with less on-board resources?...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Please ignore my ignorance but ca n't we use this to our advantage ? ... .
if this hydro is creating so many volts , why ca n't we find a way to just harvest it ?
and use it for the propulsion systems at the same time giving us more power with less on-board resources ? .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please ignore my ignorance but can't we use this to our advantage?....
if this hydro is creating so many volts, why can't we find a way to just harvest it?
and use it for the propulsion systems at the same time giving us more power with less on-board resources?...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31179652</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>budgenator</author>
	<datestamp>1265039280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchrotron\_radiation" title="wikipedia.org">synchrotron radiation</a> [wikipedia.org] would still fry you</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The synchrotron radiation [ wikipedia.org ] would still fry you</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The synchrotron radiation [wikipedia.org] would still fry you</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171014</id>
	<title>Bussard ramjet or other solutions perhaps?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265046120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In a Bussard Ramjet, the hydrogen is a feature, not a bug, something to be used as fuel.  If not that, design the ship aerodynamically (is that the right word?) with a long sharp prow to deflect the hydrogen.  Of course, by the time we can actually build such a ship, other solutions will be around.  Our current issues will be as antiquated looking as 19th century notions of a flying machine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In a Bussard Ramjet , the hydrogen is a feature , not a bug , something to be used as fuel .
If not that , design the ship aerodynamically ( is that the right word ?
) with a long sharp prow to deflect the hydrogen .
Of course , by the time we can actually build such a ship , other solutions will be around .
Our current issues will be as antiquated looking as 19th century notions of a flying machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a Bussard Ramjet, the hydrogen is a feature, not a bug, something to be used as fuel.
If not that, design the ship aerodynamically (is that the right word?
) with a long sharp prow to deflect the hydrogen.
Of course, by the time we can actually build such a ship, other solutions will be around.
Our current issues will be as antiquated looking as 19th century notions of a flying machine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176250</id>
	<title>Something hardly ever mentioned in these stories..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265019660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>OK, if one is going to do interstellar travel using conventional means (ie a reaction drive), something that is hardly ever mentioned is, how do you slow down when you get where you want to go?  If it's by some kind of rocket, whether chemical or ion beam or whatever, you've got to carry enough reaction mass to turn the darn thing around and brake as much as you accelerated.

In my one attempt at writing science fiction, I created something I called draggers.  Basically a kind of beltway of objects that ship would hook on to, kind of like a cable car.  The dragger would first sling the ship forward, slowing down in the process because it was transferring momentum, but then the ship would pull the dragger forward when it got where it was going, thus transferring the momentum back to the dragger.

I confess I didn't think about the problem of the hydrogen.  I guess I'd have to have my beltway be a kind of tunnel with a force field to keep out the hydrogen.  Like one of those high speed vacuum tube subways some folks have talked about here on earth.</htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , if one is going to do interstellar travel using conventional means ( ie a reaction drive ) , something that is hardly ever mentioned is , how do you slow down when you get where you want to go ?
If it 's by some kind of rocket , whether chemical or ion beam or whatever , you 've got to carry enough reaction mass to turn the darn thing around and brake as much as you accelerated .
In my one attempt at writing science fiction , I created something I called draggers .
Basically a kind of beltway of objects that ship would hook on to , kind of like a cable car .
The dragger would first sling the ship forward , slowing down in the process because it was transferring momentum , but then the ship would pull the dragger forward when it got where it was going , thus transferring the momentum back to the dragger .
I confess I did n't think about the problem of the hydrogen .
I guess I 'd have to have my beltway be a kind of tunnel with a force field to keep out the hydrogen .
Like one of those high speed vacuum tube subways some folks have talked about here on earth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, if one is going to do interstellar travel using conventional means (ie a reaction drive), something that is hardly ever mentioned is, how do you slow down when you get where you want to go?
If it's by some kind of rocket, whether chemical or ion beam or whatever, you've got to carry enough reaction mass to turn the darn thing around and brake as much as you accelerated.
In my one attempt at writing science fiction, I created something I called draggers.
Basically a kind of beltway of objects that ship would hook on to, kind of like a cable car.
The dragger would first sling the ship forward, slowing down in the process because it was transferring momentum, but then the ship would pull the dragger forward when it got where it was going, thus transferring the momentum back to the dragger.
I confess I didn't think about the problem of the hydrogen.
I guess I'd have to have my beltway be a kind of tunnel with a force field to keep out the hydrogen.
Like one of those high speed vacuum tube subways some folks have talked about here on earth.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173174</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>Fnkmaster</author>
	<datestamp>1265052420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, the only material difference is the time dilation factor for the person in the spaceship.  At 99.9\% the speed of light, that factor is about 22 - i.e. the 4.4 years seems to take only about 0.2 years, or 10 weeks.  At 99.999998\% of the speed of light, it is almost exactly 5000 - which means the trip would seem to pass in about 7 hours.  This is ignoring the general relativistic effects of acceleration and deceleration.</p><p>So, it's a material difference to the person traveling, but not so material to the observer stationary relative to Alpha Centauri.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the only material difference is the time dilation factor for the person in the spaceship .
At 99.9 \ % the speed of light , that factor is about 22 - i.e .
the 4.4 years seems to take only about 0.2 years , or 10 weeks .
At 99.999998 \ % of the speed of light , it is almost exactly 5000 - which means the trip would seem to pass in about 7 hours .
This is ignoring the general relativistic effects of acceleration and deceleration.So , it 's a material difference to the person traveling , but not so material to the observer stationary relative to Alpha Centauri .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the only material difference is the time dilation factor for the person in the spaceship.
At 99.9\% the speed of light, that factor is about 22 - i.e.
the 4.4 years seems to take only about 0.2 years, or 10 weeks.
At 99.999998\% of the speed of light, it is almost exactly 5000 - which means the trip would seem to pass in about 7 hours.
This is ignoring the general relativistic effects of acceleration and deceleration.So, it's a material difference to the person traveling, but not so material to the observer stationary relative to Alpha Centauri.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176944</id>
	<title>No, he's a physicist, not a physician</title>
	<author>Weedhopper</author>
	<datestamp>1265022480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you click on his name in the article, it takes you to his page, where it's fairly obvious that he's a physicist, not a physician.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you click on his name in the article , it takes you to his page , where it 's fairly obvious that he 's a physicist , not a physician .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you click on his name in the article, it takes you to his page, where it's fairly obvious that he's a physicist, not a physician.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176930</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>haruchai</author>
	<datestamp>1265022420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Work in academia; apply for a federal grant</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Work in academia ; apply for a federal grant</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Work in academia; apply for a federal grant</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038</id>
	<title>What would happen?</title>
	<author>RedMage</author>
	<datestamp>1265046180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting - what WOULD happen if you stood in front of the Large Hadron Collider beam?  Does it cut/burn like a laser, or something else?  Just wondrin'...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting - what WOULD happen if you stood in front of the Large Hadron Collider beam ?
Does it cut/burn like a laser , or something else ?
Just wondrin'.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting - what WOULD happen if you stood in front of the Large Hadron Collider beam?
Does it cut/burn like a laser, or something else?
Just wondrin'...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172484</id>
	<title>Re:What would happen?</title>
	<author>blueg3</author>
	<datestamp>1265050380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Probably the x-ray radiation produced would kill you before you got close enough to stand in front of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably the x-ray radiation produced would kill you before you got close enough to stand in front of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably the x-ray radiation produced would kill you before you got close enough to stand in front of it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170950</id>
	<title>Ramscoop</title>
	<author>Kazymyr</author>
	<datestamp>1265045940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So use a ramscoop to collect all the hydrogen that's in the way and use it for fuel. Sheesh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So use a ramscoop to collect all the hydrogen that 's in the way and use it for fuel .
Sheesh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So use a ramscoop to collect all the hydrogen that's in the way and use it for fuel.
Sheesh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31182402</id>
	<title>Re:old news... The Lensmen</title>
	<author>yellowalienbaby</author>
	<datestamp>1266495180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah.

I'm pretty sure this was covered years ago in the Lensmen series of books. They dealt with the problem through developing/copying teardrop shapes interstellar craft. In that case though, they termed it as a problem with the friction generated by all the interstellar particles.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah .
I 'm pretty sure this was covered years ago in the Lensmen series of books .
They dealt with the problem through developing/copying teardrop shapes interstellar craft .
In that case though , they termed it as a problem with the friction generated by all the interstellar particles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah.
I'm pretty sure this was covered years ago in the Lensmen series of books.
They dealt with the problem through developing/copying teardrop shapes interstellar craft.
In that case though, they termed it as a problem with the friction generated by all the interstellar particles.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31203290</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>Simetrical</author>
	<datestamp>1266570900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Accelerating to 99.999998\% of light speed in 3.5 hours would be a somewhat dizzying experience. Especially since you'd actually experience an acceleration equivalent to going to 5000 times light speed in a pure Newtonian universe. We're talking more than 500.000km/s^2 here -- or 50 million g.</p></div><p>It wouldn't be dizzying if you could apply the appropriate force uniformly across all the particles in your body.  If you were in a uniform gravitational field of 50 million g, you wouldn't even notice.  At least, not as far as I can figure.  We don't notice the force of gravity on Earth, we notice the normal force of the ground pushing up against our feet &ndash; if you jump down a long shaft in a vacuum, you'll feel weightless as you fall.

</p><p>Of course, we don't know of any way even in principle to create such a uniform force field other than actual gravity.  But this is science fiction right now anyway, right?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Accelerating to 99.999998 \ % of light speed in 3.5 hours would be a somewhat dizzying experience .
Especially since you 'd actually experience an acceleration equivalent to going to 5000 times light speed in a pure Newtonian universe .
We 're talking more than 500.000km/s ^ 2 here -- or 50 million g.It would n't be dizzying if you could apply the appropriate force uniformly across all the particles in your body .
If you were in a uniform gravitational field of 50 million g , you would n't even notice .
At least , not as far as I can figure .
We do n't notice the force of gravity on Earth , we notice the normal force of the ground pushing up against our feet    if you jump down a long shaft in a vacuum , you 'll feel weightless as you fall .
Of course , we do n't know of any way even in principle to create such a uniform force field other than actual gravity .
But this is science fiction right now anyway , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Accelerating to 99.999998\% of light speed in 3.5 hours would be a somewhat dizzying experience.
Especially since you'd actually experience an acceleration equivalent to going to 5000 times light speed in a pure Newtonian universe.
We're talking more than 500.000km/s^2 here -- or 50 million g.It wouldn't be dizzying if you could apply the appropriate force uniformly across all the particles in your body.
If you were in a uniform gravitational field of 50 million g, you wouldn't even notice.
At least, not as far as I can figure.
We don't notice the force of gravity on Earth, we notice the normal force of the ground pushing up against our feet – if you jump down a long shaft in a vacuum, you'll feel weightless as you fall.
Of course, we don't know of any way even in principle to create such a uniform force field other than actual gravity.
But this is science fiction right now anyway, right?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174074</id>
	<title>Re:True, But Irrelevant...</title>
	<author>CorporateSuit</author>
	<datestamp>1265055540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're ignoring relativity.  Yes, accelerating to that fast in a few seconds would obliterate the person; but done over the course of months/weeks/years, it may not be so messy.  From Earth's perspective, they may appear to be a flaming, burning comet screwn across half the solar system, but to them, Earth is simply getting further away, faster.<br> <br>
Twins paradox, and all that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're ignoring relativity .
Yes , accelerating to that fast in a few seconds would obliterate the person ; but done over the course of months/weeks/years , it may not be so messy .
From Earth 's perspective , they may appear to be a flaming , burning comet screwn across half the solar system , but to them , Earth is simply getting further away , faster .
Twins paradox , and all that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're ignoring relativity.
Yes, accelerating to that fast in a few seconds would obliterate the person; but done over the course of months/weeks/years, it may not be so messy.
From Earth's perspective, they may appear to be a flaming, burning comet screwn across half the solar system, but to them, Earth is simply getting further away, faster.
Twins paradox, and all that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170988</id>
	<title>Faster than light speed - Ludicrous speed</title>
	<author>Jetrel</author>
	<datestamp>1265046000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What the hell was that? They've gone to plaid!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What the hell was that ?
They 've gone to plaid !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the hell was that?
They've gone to plaid!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170866</id>
	<title>so if I stand in front of the beam...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265045760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I go back into the past ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I go back into the past ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I go back into the past ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172758</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265051160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure, just like Jon Stewart is an accurate, factual new reporter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , just like Jon Stewart is an accurate , factual new reporter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, just like Jon Stewart is an accurate, factual new reporter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176520</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>kurzweilfreak</author>
	<datestamp>1265020740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The way I understood it was the interstellar hydrogen wasn't an issue at warp speeds because of the nature of warp drive. From what I understood, warp drive created "subspace bubbles" or "warp bubbles" that literally warped space in front of and behind the ship by making space smaller in the front and larger in the back, thus propelling the ship forward. Because the ship itself never actually traveled faster than light relative to the space it was in, but that the space around it is what changed, faster than light travel was possible without violating relativity.<br> <br> If that's the case, then I would assume that as the space around the ship warps, so does any interstellar hydrogen along with it, so the hydrogen is never actually in the ship's way but is pushed out of the way by the warped space, almost as if the ship were tunneling "through" space.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The way I understood it was the interstellar hydrogen was n't an issue at warp speeds because of the nature of warp drive .
From what I understood , warp drive created " subspace bubbles " or " warp bubbles " that literally warped space in front of and behind the ship by making space smaller in the front and larger in the back , thus propelling the ship forward .
Because the ship itself never actually traveled faster than light relative to the space it was in , but that the space around it is what changed , faster than light travel was possible without violating relativity .
If that 's the case , then I would assume that as the space around the ship warps , so does any interstellar hydrogen along with it , so the hydrogen is never actually in the ship 's way but is pushed out of the way by the warped space , almost as if the ship were tunneling " through " space .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The way I understood it was the interstellar hydrogen wasn't an issue at warp speeds because of the nature of warp drive.
From what I understood, warp drive created "subspace bubbles" or "warp bubbles" that literally warped space in front of and behind the ship by making space smaller in the front and larger in the back, thus propelling the ship forward.
Because the ship itself never actually traveled faster than light relative to the space it was in, but that the space around it is what changed, faster than light travel was possible without violating relativity.
If that's the case, then I would assume that as the space around the ship warps, so does any interstellar hydrogen along with it, so the hydrogen is never actually in the ship's way but is pushed out of the way by the warped space, almost as if the ship were tunneling "through" space.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171186</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>oldhack</author>
	<datestamp>1265046600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Take it easy.  The guy works at the school of quackery, for god sake.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Take it easy .
The guy works at the school of quackery , for god sake .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take it easy.
The guy works at the school of quackery, for god sake.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171170</id>
	<title>Fascinating limitation</title>
	<author>CrimsonAvenger</author>
	<datestamp>1265046540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, what he's saying is that the interstellar hydrogen density will limit us to no more than about 9600 light years nonstop at a continuous 1g acceleration/deceleration.
</p><p>Given that even a matter/antimatter conversion drive would require about 116,000,000 tons of reaction mass (half antimatter) for every ton of payload, it would seem that we're going to be hitting a great many limits long before this particular limit begins to be meaningful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , what he 's saying is that the interstellar hydrogen density will limit us to no more than about 9600 light years nonstop at a continuous 1g acceleration/deceleration .
Given that even a matter/antimatter conversion drive would require about 116,000,000 tons of reaction mass ( half antimatter ) for every ton of payload , it would seem that we 're going to be hitting a great many limits long before this particular limit begins to be meaningful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, what he's saying is that the interstellar hydrogen density will limit us to no more than about 9600 light years nonstop at a continuous 1g acceleration/deceleration.
Given that even a matter/antimatter conversion drive would require about 116,000,000 tons of reaction mass (half antimatter) for every ton of payload, it would seem that we're going to be hitting a great many limits long before this particular limit begins to be meaningful.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172358</id>
	<title>Simple solution to simple problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265050080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Has any one ever heard of aerodynamics? Make the ship look like a cone and every thing will be deflected. And if the fleet travels in a single line, i.e. drifting, then they can possibly save on nuclear energy as all ships behind the first one wont hit any drag. Just that simple. 100\% speed of light achieved!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has any one ever heard of aerodynamics ?
Make the ship look like a cone and every thing will be deflected .
And if the fleet travels in a single line , i.e .
drifting , then they can possibly save on nuclear energy as all ships behind the first one wont hit any drag .
Just that simple .
100 \ % speed of light achieved !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has any one ever heard of aerodynamics?
Make the ship look like a cone and every thing will be deflected.
And if the fleet travels in a single line, i.e.
drifting, then they can possibly save on nuclear energy as all ships behind the first one wont hit any drag.
Just that simple.
100\% speed of light achieved!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171886</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>Aerynvala</author>
	<datestamp>1265048520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I thought they changed their name to SyFi.</p></div><p>No, <a href="http://www.syfy.com/" title="syfy.com">SyFy</a> [syfy.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought they changed their name to SyFi.No , SyFy [ syfy.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought they changed their name to SyFi.No, SyFy [syfy.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172014</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265048940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is where you deploy the redirectors.  To capture that energy and use it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is where you deploy the redirectors .
To capture that energy and use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is where you deploy the redirectors.
To capture that energy and use it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171942</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265048700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And only if we get some serious life extension technologies going too. We have the life span of a gnat. We are not meant for space. We're too fragile too.</p><p>Realistically, we only have 10 to 20 years of useful life. 0-23 is learning time, since a bachelor's is a minimum these days, and would you send high schoolers in space?<br>From about 23 to 43 you get a nice useful span, peaking at about 30. Then after about 43, you rapidly disintegrate. Your brain gets slower, your body bigger, slower and unhealthy. You can deny reality all you want, I'm 38, and I *know* this is true, I can *feel* it.</p><p>Even if we get the fantastic (in the original sense of the word, that is, fantasy-based) space technologies working, you still end up with the fact that most people you know will be dead by the time you get anywhere and back in space. Space is big, we are not.</p><p>We do not have the technology or the energy resources to do anything in space other than floating around a bit, or sending small probes here and there. We are still at the 19th century level of technology, with a few refinements plus electronics. That's it. Our energy comes from a few hundred cubic miles of underground plant goo. We burn it. That's it. That's our technology. Nuclear? Give me a break. These are steam turbines. We burn finite amounts of uranium to do it. Coal? Well, more plant goo.</p><p>Combine that with the fact that most people are basically dangerous children in small, fragile bodies, and space is the least of our concerns. We can't do anything up there because we fall apart, and there's nothing to gain from space because the only "space" we have access to is barely out of our atmosphere. There's nothing in space. It's a big vacuum.</p><p>Space is a non-issue until we live a lot longer and have real energy resources and real medical technology.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And only if we get some serious life extension technologies going too .
We have the life span of a gnat .
We are not meant for space .
We 're too fragile too.Realistically , we only have 10 to 20 years of useful life .
0-23 is learning time , since a bachelor 's is a minimum these days , and would you send high schoolers in space ? From about 23 to 43 you get a nice useful span , peaking at about 30 .
Then after about 43 , you rapidly disintegrate .
Your brain gets slower , your body bigger , slower and unhealthy .
You can deny reality all you want , I 'm 38 , and I * know * this is true , I can * feel * it.Even if we get the fantastic ( in the original sense of the word , that is , fantasy-based ) space technologies working , you still end up with the fact that most people you know will be dead by the time you get anywhere and back in space .
Space is big , we are not.We do not have the technology or the energy resources to do anything in space other than floating around a bit , or sending small probes here and there .
We are still at the 19th century level of technology , with a few refinements plus electronics .
That 's it .
Our energy comes from a few hundred cubic miles of underground plant goo .
We burn it .
That 's it .
That 's our technology .
Nuclear ? Give me a break .
These are steam turbines .
We burn finite amounts of uranium to do it .
Coal ? Well , more plant goo.Combine that with the fact that most people are basically dangerous children in small , fragile bodies , and space is the least of our concerns .
We ca n't do anything up there because we fall apart , and there 's nothing to gain from space because the only " space " we have access to is barely out of our atmosphere .
There 's nothing in space .
It 's a big vacuum.Space is a non-issue until we live a lot longer and have real energy resources and real medical technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And only if we get some serious life extension technologies going too.
We have the life span of a gnat.
We are not meant for space.
We're too fragile too.Realistically, we only have 10 to 20 years of useful life.
0-23 is learning time, since a bachelor's is a minimum these days, and would you send high schoolers in space?From about 23 to 43 you get a nice useful span, peaking at about 30.
Then after about 43, you rapidly disintegrate.
Your brain gets slower, your body bigger, slower and unhealthy.
You can deny reality all you want, I'm 38, and I *know* this is true, I can *feel* it.Even if we get the fantastic (in the original sense of the word, that is, fantasy-based) space technologies working, you still end up with the fact that most people you know will be dead by the time you get anywhere and back in space.
Space is big, we are not.We do not have the technology or the energy resources to do anything in space other than floating around a bit, or sending small probes here and there.
We are still at the 19th century level of technology, with a few refinements plus electronics.
That's it.
Our energy comes from a few hundred cubic miles of underground plant goo.
We burn it.
That's it.
That's our technology.
Nuclear? Give me a break.
These are steam turbines.
We burn finite amounts of uranium to do it.
Coal? Well, more plant goo.Combine that with the fact that most people are basically dangerous children in small, fragile bodies, and space is the least of our concerns.
We can't do anything up there because we fall apart, and there's nothing to gain from space because the only "space" we have access to is barely out of our atmosphere.
There's nothing in space.
It's a big vacuum.Space is a non-issue until we live a lot longer and have real energy resources and real medical technology.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31182436</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>DamienNightbane</author>
	<datestamp>1266495600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In this case, I think it would be more akin to a Bussard Scramjet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In this case , I think it would be more akin to a Bussard Scramjet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In this case, I think it would be more akin to a Bussard Scramjet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31250038</id>
	<title>Use a mag scoop aka Bussard ramjet.</title>
	<author>Criton</author>
	<datestamp>1266918420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just use a magnetic scoop sorta a VASIMR engine in reverse and scoop up the hydrogen atoms and concentrate them.
They'll under go fusion and you get some extra thrust</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just use a magnetic scoop sorta a VASIMR engine in reverse and scoop up the hydrogen atoms and concentrate them .
They 'll under go fusion and you get some extra thrust</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just use a magnetic scoop sorta a VASIMR engine in reverse and scoop up the hydrogen atoms and concentrate them.
They'll under go fusion and you get some extra thrust</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171102</id>
	<title>Current Science</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265046360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How can the earth be round? Would one not fall off? Preposterous!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How can the earth be round ?
Would one not fall off ?
Preposterous !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How can the earth be round?
Would one not fall off?
Preposterous!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174742</id>
	<title>Means it'll work better</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265057820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just figure out how to harness these 7 teraelectron volts and make the ship go FASTER!  You could also feed the hydrogen shockwaves into an alternative fuel tank for lower speed motivation, there-by reducing the amount of fuel you need to carry for non-FTL travel...  As an added bonus, this now-motivated hydrogen will increase your mass, and therefore, increase your momentum, so the hydrogen still ahead of the ship would effect the ship even less.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just figure out how to harness these 7 teraelectron volts and make the ship go FASTER !
You could also feed the hydrogen shockwaves into an alternative fuel tank for lower speed motivation , there-by reducing the amount of fuel you need to carry for non-FTL travel... As an added bonus , this now-motivated hydrogen will increase your mass , and therefore , increase your momentum , so the hydrogen still ahead of the ship would effect the ship even less .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just figure out how to harness these 7 teraelectron volts and make the ship go FASTER!
You could also feed the hydrogen shockwaves into an alternative fuel tank for lower speed motivation, there-by reducing the amount of fuel you need to carry for non-FTL travel...  As an added bonus, this now-motivated hydrogen will increase your mass, and therefore, increase your momentum, so the hydrogen still ahead of the ship would effect the ship even less.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173486</id>
	<title>Re:What would happen?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265053500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Others have covered the "You die" aspect, but as far as the energy goes, consider it approximately the same as burning 10 liters of vegetable oil.  (See Mythbusters for an idea what sort of conflagration that could be.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Others have covered the " You die " aspect , but as far as the energy goes , consider it approximately the same as burning 10 liters of vegetable oil .
( See Mythbusters for an idea what sort of conflagration that could be .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Others have covered the "You die" aspect, but as far as the energy goes, consider it approximately the same as burning 10 liters of vegetable oil.
(See Mythbusters for an idea what sort of conflagration that could be.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172340</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>hypergreatthing</author>
	<datestamp>1265050020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who say's it's not colonized?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who say 's it 's not colonized ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who say's it's not colonized?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172468</id>
	<title>I call</title>
	<author>the\_hellspawn</author>
	<datestamp>1265050380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>bullshit</htmltext>
<tokenext>bullshit</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bullshit</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173858</id>
	<title>Re:Considering the energy required. . .</title>
	<author>Carbaholic</author>
	<datestamp>1265054760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This solution would also solve our global warming problems!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This solution would also solve our global warming problems !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This solution would also solve our global warming problems!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176970</id>
	<title>SETI</title>
	<author>barv</author>
	<datestamp>1265022600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Has anybody told SETI yet?  This discovery explains why we aren't yet overrun by BEM's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anybody told SETI yet ?
This discovery explains why we are n't yet overrun by BEM 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anybody told SETI yet?
This discovery explains why we aren't yet overrun by BEM's.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171440</id>
	<title>Physician, not physicist</title>
	<author>Al Al Cool J</author>
	<datestamp>1265047260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What does this guy know about space travel?  He's a prof at a <b>medical school</b>, FFS.  This is rocket science, not brain surgery!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What does this guy know about space travel ?
He 's a prof at a medical school , FFS .
This is rocket science , not brain surgery !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does this guy know about space travel?
He's a prof at a medical school, FFS.
This is rocket science, not brain surgery!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171226</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265046720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, and if I have the magic ring I can disappear too!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , and if I have the magic ring I can disappear too !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, and if I have the magic ring I can disappear too!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265050080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>And I was just about to get into my 99.999998\% lightspeed spaceship.</i> <br>
<br>
Aside from the current nonexistence of such a craft, that really <i>does</i> count as the faulty
premise with Edelstein's conclusion...<br>
<br>
Why <b>would</b> you go that fast (presuming you can't go much <i>faster</i>, of course)?  It takes exponentially more energy to
accelerate as you approach the speed of light, but that <i>doesn't</i> get you to your destination all that much faster.  At a
mere 99.9\% of the speed of light, you spend less than one extra hour of travel (externally measured, of course) per month.  For
a "realistic" trip to nearby stars, that means an extra day and a half out of the 4.37 years to get to Alpha Centauri.<br>
<br>
For relatively local trips, the difference amounts to a triviality - And longer trips simply will never happen unless
we have some breakthrough that makes Star-Trek-like warp engines a reality.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And I was just about to get into my 99.999998 \ % lightspeed spaceship .
Aside from the current nonexistence of such a craft , that really does count as the faulty premise with Edelstein 's conclusion.. . Why would you go that fast ( presuming you ca n't go much faster , of course ) ?
It takes exponentially more energy to accelerate as you approach the speed of light , but that does n't get you to your destination all that much faster .
At a mere 99.9 \ % of the speed of light , you spend less than one extra hour of travel ( externally measured , of course ) per month .
For a " realistic " trip to nearby stars , that means an extra day and a half out of the 4.37 years to get to Alpha Centauri .
For relatively local trips , the difference amounts to a triviality - And longer trips simply will never happen unless we have some breakthrough that makes Star-Trek-like warp engines a reality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I was just about to get into my 99.999998\% lightspeed spaceship.
Aside from the current nonexistence of such a craft, that really does count as the faulty
premise with Edelstein's conclusion...

Why would you go that fast (presuming you can't go much faster, of course)?
It takes exponentially more energy to
accelerate as you approach the speed of light, but that doesn't get you to your destination all that much faster.
At a
mere 99.9\% of the speed of light, you spend less than one extra hour of travel (externally measured, of course) per month.
For
a "realistic" trip to nearby stars, that means an extra day and a half out of the 4.37 years to get to Alpha Centauri.
For relatively local trips, the difference amounts to a triviality - And longer trips simply will never happen unless
we have some breakthrough that makes Star-Trek-like warp engines a reality.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173492</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>SQLGuru</author>
	<datestamp>1265053500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My Precious!  Wants It!  Give me Precious!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My Precious !
Wants It !
Give me Precious !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My Precious!
Wants It!
Give me Precious!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171226</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174122</id>
	<title>TSA</title>
	<author>WPIDalamar</author>
	<datestamp>1265055660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The real reason interstellar travel will never happen is the time in the security line with TSA would approach infinity for that sort of trip.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The real reason interstellar travel will never happen is the time in the security line with TSA would approach infinity for that sort of trip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real reason interstellar travel will never happen is the time in the security line with TSA would approach infinity for that sort of trip.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174680</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>furby076</author>
	<datestamp>1265057520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Interstellar travel makes for great space opera, but it has no more bearing on reality than unicorns and dragons</p></div><p>While this is true, and likely to remain true for a long long long LONG freaking time if ever....and I know it is true...it is still depressing and sinks the heart reading it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(<br> <br>
It also makes it that much more important that we take care of this rock we call home</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Interstellar travel makes for great space opera , but it has no more bearing on reality than unicorns and dragonsWhile this is true , and likely to remain true for a long long long LONG freaking time if ever....and I know it is true...it is still depressing and sinks the heart reading it : ( It also makes it that much more important that we take care of this rock we call home</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interstellar travel makes for great space opera, but it has no more bearing on reality than unicorns and dragonsWhile this is true, and likely to remain true for a long long long LONG freaking time if ever....and I know it is true...it is still depressing and sinks the heart reading it :( 
It also makes it that much more important that we take care of this rock we call home
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172786</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>CharlyFoxtrot</author>
	<datestamp>1265051220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If we're assuming technology capable of interstellar travel why would we have to go ourselves ? Simply send a ship capable of growing a human body from stem cells and imprinting it with a personality once you get there. The ship itself could then stay mostly inert with a small core active to preserve the biological materials, containment could be done with a living biological "seal" instead of rubber and plastics. To avoid mutation in the biological components you could coat the outside of the ship with a "shield" of a 100m or so of good old H2O.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If we 're assuming technology capable of interstellar travel why would we have to go ourselves ?
Simply send a ship capable of growing a human body from stem cells and imprinting it with a personality once you get there .
The ship itself could then stay mostly inert with a small core active to preserve the biological materials , containment could be done with a living biological " seal " instead of rubber and plastics .
To avoid mutation in the biological components you could coat the outside of the ship with a " shield " of a 100m or so of good old H2O .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we're assuming technology capable of interstellar travel why would we have to go ourselves ?
Simply send a ship capable of growing a human body from stem cells and imprinting it with a personality once you get there.
The ship itself could then stay mostly inert with a small core active to preserve the biological materials, containment could be done with a living biological "seal" instead of rubber and plastics.
To avoid mutation in the biological components you could coat the outside of the ship with a "shield" of a 100m or so of good old H2O.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171300</id>
	<title>relativity</title>
	<author>StripedCow</author>
	<datestamp>1265046960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess that we're just lucky that Earth is moving at roughly the same speed as those hydrogen atoms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess that we 're just lucky that Earth is moving at roughly the same speed as those hydrogen atoms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess that we're just lucky that Earth is moving at roughly the same speed as those hydrogen atoms.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172224</id>
	<title>you mean theory</title>
	<author>mosb1000</author>
	<datestamp>1265049600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>According to the <b>theories</b> developed by Tessa Wendel</p></div></blockquote><p>There's a little difference between facts and theories.  Facts have been tested, theories have not.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to the theories developed by Tessa WendelThere 's a little difference between facts and theories .
Facts have been tested , theories have not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to the theories developed by Tessa WendelThere's a little difference between facts and theories.
Facts have been tested, theories have not.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178978</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265033520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your energy requirements and Fermi Paradox statements are contradictory. The mathematical colonization speed studies are assuming best-case Von Neumann probes... and that really is a lot of assumption, including assuming tech that we're currently not even sure is possible.</p><p>Using your own requirement of at least a Type I on the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev\_scale" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev\_scale</a> [wikipedia.org] and on the way to Type II, it'd take far, far longer. If we don't have magic nanotech and don't find 'perfect' target planets, a colony ship is going to take a few thousand years before it can even begin to try living on a new planet. And once it does get to the point where it could reasonably quickly colonize a planet, it probably wouldn't be in much of a hurry; this would be a civilization many generations removed from ours, retaining our tech... they probably aren't going to care to breed fast. It could take them hundreds of thousands of years to 'fill' a new planet; more if the system has several good planets. And then they'd need to climb all the way up to Type II on their own before considering sending colony ships of their own.</p><p>Considering that spacefaring species may not be in any kind of hurry to spread past the first dozen colony systems, a better expression of the Fermi Paradox would be "where are all the Dyson spheres?" (or at least the intermediate stages of construction, which would be detectable from here). We've only just started to consider looking for those. The distribution of them, or the lack of them, would tell us a lot about the frequency of life that reaches that level. I assume intelligent life isn't unique to the universe, but it could still be relatively rare/young enough that there are only a few in each galaxy like ours. Especially if it takes a lot of generations of star birth/dead to amass enough of the heavier elements; considering our own star has a lifespan of billions of years, we really haven't been through all that many star generations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your energy requirements and Fermi Paradox statements are contradictory .
The mathematical colonization speed studies are assuming best-case Von Neumann probes... and that really is a lot of assumption , including assuming tech that we 're currently not even sure is possible.Using your own requirement of at least a Type I on the http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev \ _scale [ wikipedia.org ] and on the way to Type II , it 'd take far , far longer .
If we do n't have magic nanotech and do n't find 'perfect ' target planets , a colony ship is going to take a few thousand years before it can even begin to try living on a new planet .
And once it does get to the point where it could reasonably quickly colonize a planet , it probably would n't be in much of a hurry ; this would be a civilization many generations removed from ours , retaining our tech... they probably are n't going to care to breed fast .
It could take them hundreds of thousands of years to 'fill ' a new planet ; more if the system has several good planets .
And then they 'd need to climb all the way up to Type II on their own before considering sending colony ships of their own.Considering that spacefaring species may not be in any kind of hurry to spread past the first dozen colony systems , a better expression of the Fermi Paradox would be " where are all the Dyson spheres ?
" ( or at least the intermediate stages of construction , which would be detectable from here ) .
We 've only just started to consider looking for those .
The distribution of them , or the lack of them , would tell us a lot about the frequency of life that reaches that level .
I assume intelligent life is n't unique to the universe , but it could still be relatively rare/young enough that there are only a few in each galaxy like ours .
Especially if it takes a lot of generations of star birth/dead to amass enough of the heavier elements ; considering our own star has a lifespan of billions of years , we really have n't been through all that many star generations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your energy requirements and Fermi Paradox statements are contradictory.
The mathematical colonization speed studies are assuming best-case Von Neumann probes... and that really is a lot of assumption, including assuming tech that we're currently not even sure is possible.Using your own requirement of at least a Type I on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev\_scale [wikipedia.org] and on the way to Type II, it'd take far, far longer.
If we don't have magic nanotech and don't find 'perfect' target planets, a colony ship is going to take a few thousand years before it can even begin to try living on a new planet.
And once it does get to the point where it could reasonably quickly colonize a planet, it probably wouldn't be in much of a hurry; this would be a civilization many generations removed from ours, retaining our tech... they probably aren't going to care to breed fast.
It could take them hundreds of thousands of years to 'fill' a new planet; more if the system has several good planets.
And then they'd need to climb all the way up to Type II on their own before considering sending colony ships of their own.Considering that spacefaring species may not be in any kind of hurry to spread past the first dozen colony systems, a better expression of the Fermi Paradox would be "where are all the Dyson spheres?
" (or at least the intermediate stages of construction, which would be detectable from here).
We've only just started to consider looking for those.
The distribution of them, or the lack of them, would tell us a lot about the frequency of life that reaches that level.
I assume intelligent life isn't unique to the universe, but it could still be relatively rare/young enough that there are only a few in each galaxy like ours.
Especially if it takes a lot of generations of star birth/dead to amass enough of the heavier elements; considering our own star has a lifespan of billions of years, we really haven't been through all that many star generations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171324</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265047020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most engineers have no imagination.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most engineers have no imagination .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most engineers have no imagination.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171500</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265047440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Seriously, any number of sci-fi authors have covered this problem in enormous detail over the last few decades</p></div></blockquote><p>Yes, any number of sci-fi authors have handwaved around these problems for the last few years.  Actual scientists, not so much.  And, as with TFA, the conclusions of the ones that have been less than sanguine.  (From the POV of actually doing it.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , any number of sci-fi authors have covered this problem in enormous detail over the last few decadesYes , any number of sci-fi authors have handwaved around these problems for the last few years .
Actual scientists , not so much .
And , as with TFA , the conclusions of the ones that have been less than sanguine .
( From the POV of actually doing it .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, any number of sci-fi authors have covered this problem in enormous detail over the last few decadesYes, any number of sci-fi authors have handwaved around these problems for the last few years.
Actual scientists, not so much.
And, as with TFA, the conclusions of the ones that have been less than sanguine.
(From the POV of actually doing it.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172542</id>
	<title>Mass Shield - A. C. Clarke</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265050560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In "Songs from Distant Earth", Clarke proposes an interstellar ship with a massive shield of ice (like a mile thick, IIRC) in front of their ship.  The story assumed easy ground-to-orbit and infinite energy, so it's science maybe questionable, but sufficiently large ablative shield could be a low-tech solution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In " Songs from Distant Earth " , Clarke proposes an interstellar ship with a massive shield of ice ( like a mile thick , IIRC ) in front of their ship .
The story assumed easy ground-to-orbit and infinite energy , so it 's science maybe questionable , but sufficiently large ablative shield could be a low-tech solution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In "Songs from Distant Earth", Clarke proposes an interstellar ship with a massive shield of ice (like a mile thick, IIRC) in front of their ship.
The story assumed easy ground-to-orbit and infinite energy, so it's science maybe questionable, but sufficiently large ablative shield could be a low-tech solution.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174290</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>khallow</author>
	<datestamp>1265056200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sending a Shuttle-sized craft to Alpha Centauri in a matter of years would require roughly the current total energy consumption of humanity.</p></div><p>It depends on the number of years, that is, how fast you are going. For example, 100 metric tons (Shuttle sized) going half the speed of light would have a kinetic energy of around 390 billion megawatt hours (MwH) (here, kinetic energy, K = mc^2*(1/SQRT(1-v^2/c^2) -1) where m is the mass, c speed of light, and v the velocity of the vehicle). That's roughly 3 years of global power generation at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World\_energy\_resources\_and\_consumption" title="wikipedia.org">15 trillion watts average generation</a> [wikipedia.org] (current global energy consumption). If it were traveling at 0.1c, then the kinetic energy would be roughly 13 billion MwH which would be a bit over a month of global power generation. You have to double those figures (since you need to slow down at the other end) to yield roughly 6 years and 2 months of power generation respectively.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>if you can comfortably survive for millennia in interstellar space, why even bother with stars in the first place?</p></div><p>Because that is where the accessible energy and matter are.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sending a Shuttle-sized craft to Alpha Centauri in a matter of years would require roughly the current total energy consumption of humanity.It depends on the number of years , that is , how fast you are going .
For example , 100 metric tons ( Shuttle sized ) going half the speed of light would have a kinetic energy of around 390 billion megawatt hours ( MwH ) ( here , kinetic energy , K = mc ^ 2 * ( 1/SQRT ( 1-v ^ 2/c ^ 2 ) -1 ) where m is the mass , c speed of light , and v the velocity of the vehicle ) .
That 's roughly 3 years of global power generation at 15 trillion watts average generation [ wikipedia.org ] ( current global energy consumption ) .
If it were traveling at 0.1c , then the kinetic energy would be roughly 13 billion MwH which would be a bit over a month of global power generation .
You have to double those figures ( since you need to slow down at the other end ) to yield roughly 6 years and 2 months of power generation respectively.if you can comfortably survive for millennia in interstellar space , why even bother with stars in the first place ? Because that is where the accessible energy and matter are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sending a Shuttle-sized craft to Alpha Centauri in a matter of years would require roughly the current total energy consumption of humanity.It depends on the number of years, that is, how fast you are going.
For example, 100 metric tons (Shuttle sized) going half the speed of light would have a kinetic energy of around 390 billion megawatt hours (MwH) (here, kinetic energy, K = mc^2*(1/SQRT(1-v^2/c^2) -1) where m is the mass, c speed of light, and v the velocity of the vehicle).
That's roughly 3 years of global power generation at 15 trillion watts average generation [wikipedia.org] (current global energy consumption).
If it were traveling at 0.1c, then the kinetic energy would be roughly 13 billion MwH which would be a bit over a month of global power generation.
You have to double those figures (since you need to slow down at the other end) to yield roughly 6 years and 2 months of power generation respectively.if you can comfortably survive for millennia in interstellar space, why even bother with stars in the first place?Because that is where the accessible energy and matter are.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171492</id>
	<title>Re:Lightspeed is so 1960's.</title>
	<author>Rockoon</author>
	<datestamp>1265047440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sure, it seems infinitely fast, but it's really not going to get us anywhere all that interesting in a single lifetime.</p></div><p>
For the personal traveling at that speed, it most certainly WILL be a single lifetime. In fact, the trip would seem to them to be instantaneous.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , it seems infinitely fast , but it 's really not going to get us anywhere all that interesting in a single lifetime .
For the personal traveling at that speed , it most certainly WILL be a single lifetime .
In fact , the trip would seem to them to be instantaneous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, it seems infinitely fast, but it's really not going to get us anywhere all that interesting in a single lifetime.
For the personal traveling at that speed, it most certainly WILL be a single lifetime.
In fact, the trip would seem to them to be instantaneous.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171706</id>
	<title>Same ol' same ol'</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265048100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Remember the times "scientists" claimed it would be deadly to go more than 20mph in a car because the air would get too thin around you and you would suffocate? Good times..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Remember the times " scientists " claimed it would be deadly to go more than 20mph in a car because the air would get too thin around you and you would suffocate ?
Good times. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remember the times "scientists" claimed it would be deadly to go more than 20mph in a car because the air would get too thin around you and you would suffocate?
Good times..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174176</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>Tetsujin</author>
	<datestamp>1265055840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why <b>would</b> you go that fast (presuming you can't go much <i>faster</i>, of course)?  It takes exponentially more energy to<br>accelerate as you approach the speed of light, but that <i>doesn't</i> get you to your destination all that much faster.  At a<br>mere 99.9\% of the speed of light, you spend less than one extra hour of travel (externally measured, of course) per month.  For<br>a "realistic" trip to nearby stars, that means an extra day and a half out of the 4.37 years to get to Alpha Centauri.</p></div><p>Well, no, but it <em>seems</em> faster...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would you go that fast ( presuming you ca n't go much faster , of course ) ?
It takes exponentially more energy toaccelerate as you approach the speed of light , but that does n't get you to your destination all that much faster .
At amere 99.9 \ % of the speed of light , you spend less than one extra hour of travel ( externally measured , of course ) per month .
Fora " realistic " trip to nearby stars , that means an extra day and a half out of the 4.37 years to get to Alpha Centauri.Well , no , but it seems faster.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would you go that fast (presuming you can't go much faster, of course)?
It takes exponentially more energy toaccelerate as you approach the speed of light, but that doesn't get you to your destination all that much faster.
At amere 99.9\% of the speed of light, you spend less than one extra hour of travel (externally measured, of course) per month.
Fora "realistic" trip to nearby stars, that means an extra day and a half out of the 4.37 years to get to Alpha Centauri.Well, no, but it seems faster...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31182876</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>severn2j</author>
	<datestamp>1266500460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sending a Shuttle-sized craft to Alpha Centauri in a matter of years would require roughly the current total energy consumption of humanity.</p></div><p>Just a thought (and Im not a physicist, so have no idea about the numbers involved), but could we not send something much smaller and lighter, say just a few kilos and the size of a laptop, something that could take pictures and be smart enough to search for planets in the Alpha Centauri system and navigate to them..  Even if it takes 20 or 30 years to get there, the data it sent back would surely be invaluable and would take a lot less time than waiting for some kind of wormhole technology to be invented.  Does anyone know if this is possible with our current tech or in the near future?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sending a Shuttle-sized craft to Alpha Centauri in a matter of years would require roughly the current total energy consumption of humanity.Just a thought ( and Im not a physicist , so have no idea about the numbers involved ) , but could we not send something much smaller and lighter , say just a few kilos and the size of a laptop , something that could take pictures and be smart enough to search for planets in the Alpha Centauri system and navigate to them.. Even if it takes 20 or 30 years to get there , the data it sent back would surely be invaluable and would take a lot less time than waiting for some kind of wormhole technology to be invented .
Does anyone know if this is possible with our current tech or in the near future ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sending a Shuttle-sized craft to Alpha Centauri in a matter of years would require roughly the current total energy consumption of humanity.Just a thought (and Im not a physicist, so have no idea about the numbers involved), but could we not send something much smaller and lighter, say just a few kilos and the size of a laptop, something that could take pictures and be smart enough to search for planets in the Alpha Centauri system and navigate to them..  Even if it takes 20 or 30 years to get there, the data it sent back would surely be invaluable and would take a lot less time than waiting for some kind of wormhole technology to be invented.
Does anyone know if this is possible with our current tech or in the near future?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31177224</id>
	<title>Poul Anderson solved all this</title>
	<author>Werrismys</author>
	<datestamp>1265023740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lasers in front to plasmatize the hydrogen, huge magnetic fields to move the plasma to the REAR of the ship, where a "virtual" burn chamber (really just magnetic fields) captures the plasma. Another mag field keeps the antimatter from touching anything, and gradually releases anti-atoms to the furnace. BOOM mega boost. Easy to shield mere energies if you can do all that trickery with fields. Certainly possible - just very, very hard.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lasers in front to plasmatize the hydrogen , huge magnetic fields to move the plasma to the REAR of the ship , where a " virtual " burn chamber ( really just magnetic fields ) captures the plasma .
Another mag field keeps the antimatter from touching anything , and gradually releases anti-atoms to the furnace .
BOOM mega boost .
Easy to shield mere energies if you can do all that trickery with fields .
Certainly possible - just very , very hard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lasers in front to plasmatize the hydrogen, huge magnetic fields to move the plasma to the REAR of the ship, where a "virtual" burn chamber (really just magnetic fields) captures the plasma.
Another mag field keeps the antimatter from touching anything, and gradually releases anti-atoms to the furnace.
BOOM mega boost.
Easy to shield mere energies if you can do all that trickery with fields.
Certainly possible - just very, very hard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178110</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>Trogre</author>
	<datestamp>1265027400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're thinking of the shuttlecock, I mean, ramscoop in front of Red Dwarf.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're thinking of the shuttlecock , I mean , ramscoop in front of Red Dwarf .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're thinking of the shuttlecock, I mean, ramscoop in front of Red Dwarf.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174758</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>HermDog</author>
	<datestamp>1265057880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Interstellar travel makes for great space opera, but it has no more bearing on reality than unicorns and dragons.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Oh, you can scoff. The only reason why the entire galaxy wasn't colonized millions of years ago is because, as everyone knows, unicorns and dragons lack opposable thumbs and are consequently a little behind on drawing up the specs for their interstellar sleeper warp-drive jumpships.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Interstellar travel makes for great space opera , but it has no more bearing on reality than unicorns and dragons .
Oh , you can scoff .
The only reason why the entire galaxy was n't colonized millions of years ago is because , as everyone knows , unicorns and dragons lack opposable thumbs and are consequently a little behind on drawing up the specs for their interstellar sleeper warp-drive jumpships .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interstellar travel makes for great space opera, but it has no more bearing on reality than unicorns and dragons.
Oh, you can scoff.
The only reason why the entire galaxy wasn't colonized millions of years ago is because, as everyone knows, unicorns and dragons lack opposable thumbs and are consequently a little behind on drawing up the specs for their interstellar sleeper warp-drive jumpships.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171772</id>
	<title>So to sum up . . .</title>
	<author>base3</author>
	<datestamp>1265048280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FTL FTL.</htmltext>
<tokenext>FTL FTL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTL FTL.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178364</id>
	<title>other 'Star/Planetary Systems' not 'Solar Systems'</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265028840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Oh &mdash; and the Fermi Paradox applies especially well. Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system, and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period.</p></div><p>While we're being picky, there is only one, "Solar System." Uno. It is ours. So named because it's parent star, the sun, is named, "Sol." Unless some other intelligence named their parent star, "Sol," we've got the only one. All other clustered gravitational systems surrounding other stars are either <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary\_system" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Planetary Systems</a> [wikipedia.org] or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star\_system" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Star Systems</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>If you really want to be picky about 'gravitational systems' there are also <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">galaxies</a> [wikipedia.org] and the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">universe</a> [wikipedia.org] which are all gravitationally related as well, limited by perception and scale.</p><p>Regarding the Fermi Paradox, and I'll be honest I find this just as hard to swallow, maybe, just maybe, we got here first. Someone had to. That's a lonely thought.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh    and the Fermi Paradox applies especially well .
Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system , and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period.While we 're being picky , there is only one , " Solar System .
" Uno .
It is ours .
So named because it 's parent star , the sun , is named , " Sol .
" Unless some other intelligence named their parent star , " Sol , " we 've got the only one .
All other clustered gravitational systems surrounding other stars are either Planetary Systems [ wikipedia.org ] or Star Systems [ wikipedia.org ] .If you really want to be picky about 'gravitational systems ' there are also galaxies [ wikipedia.org ] and the universe [ wikipedia.org ] which are all gravitationally related as well , limited by perception and scale.Regarding the Fermi Paradox , and I 'll be honest I find this just as hard to swallow , maybe , just maybe , we got here first .
Someone had to .
That 's a lonely thought .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh — and the Fermi Paradox applies especially well.
Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system, and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period.While we're being picky, there is only one, "Solar System.
" Uno.
It is ours.
So named because it's parent star, the sun, is named, "Sol.
" Unless some other intelligence named their parent star, "Sol," we've got the only one.
All other clustered gravitational systems surrounding other stars are either Planetary Systems [wikipedia.org] or Star Systems [wikipedia.org].If you really want to be picky about 'gravitational systems' there are also galaxies [wikipedia.org] and the universe [wikipedia.org] which are all gravitationally related as well, limited by perception and scale.Regarding the Fermi Paradox, and I'll be honest I find this just as hard to swallow, maybe, just maybe, we got here first.
Someone had to.
That's a lonely thought.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174400</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>shadowfaxcrx</author>
	<datestamp>1265056680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Warp drive doesn't posit a traditional "go-very-fast-through-normal-space" type of spacecraft engine - it warps[*] space-time (hence the name!) in front of and behind the spacecraft - see <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre\_drive" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">here</a> [wikipedia.org] for an explanation. The spacecraft itself is sitting in a bubble of normal space, possibly even at rest.</p></div><p>Yes, but the current school of thought is that it would not be a violation of the laws of physics to do this, but even assuming we invented the technology that was capable of it, it would require so much energy as to make it completely unworkable. That alliance with the Klingons isn't going to last very long if we have to extract all the energy on their planet to get back home after a diplomatic mission<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>That said, I'm sure that eventually (barring our extinction) we will figure out how to travel faster than light speed.</p><p>Remember, before Bell Aircraft came along and just did it, scientists opined that breaking the sound barrier was impossible too.</p><p>If we went back to the dark ages and told them about cars, and GPS navigation, and fighter planes, they'd say it was impossible, just as we are now saying that FTL travel is impossible.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Warp drive does n't posit a traditional " go-very-fast-through-normal-space " type of spacecraft engine - it warps [ * ] space-time ( hence the name !
) in front of and behind the spacecraft - see here [ wikipedia.org ] for an explanation .
The spacecraft itself is sitting in a bubble of normal space , possibly even at rest.Yes , but the current school of thought is that it would not be a violation of the laws of physics to do this , but even assuming we invented the technology that was capable of it , it would require so much energy as to make it completely unworkable .
That alliance with the Klingons is n't going to last very long if we have to extract all the energy on their planet to get back home after a diplomatic mission ; ) That said , I 'm sure that eventually ( barring our extinction ) we will figure out how to travel faster than light speed.Remember , before Bell Aircraft came along and just did it , scientists opined that breaking the sound barrier was impossible too.If we went back to the dark ages and told them about cars , and GPS navigation , and fighter planes , they 'd say it was impossible , just as we are now saying that FTL travel is impossible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Warp drive doesn't posit a traditional "go-very-fast-through-normal-space" type of spacecraft engine - it warps[*] space-time (hence the name!
) in front of and behind the spacecraft - see here [wikipedia.org] for an explanation.
The spacecraft itself is sitting in a bubble of normal space, possibly even at rest.Yes, but the current school of thought is that it would not be a violation of the laws of physics to do this, but even assuming we invented the technology that was capable of it, it would require so much energy as to make it completely unworkable.
That alliance with the Klingons isn't going to last very long if we have to extract all the energy on their planet to get back home after a diplomatic mission ;)That said, I'm sure that eventually (barring our extinction) we will figure out how to travel faster than light speed.Remember, before Bell Aircraft came along and just did it, scientists opined that breaking the sound barrier was impossible too.If we went back to the dark ages and told them about cars, and GPS navigation, and fighter planes, they'd say it was impossible, just as we are now saying that FTL travel is impossible.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31183732</id>
	<title>Re:7 teraelectron volts?</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1266505380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wuss.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wuss .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wuss.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172768</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>Syberz</author>
	<datestamp>1265051160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dangerous perhaps, but if there's a chance we can get Fantastic 4 like powers when it happens then I'm in... well, unless I could turn into the Thing and that would just suck <a href="http://www.cad-comic.com/cad/20050304/#n629" title="cad-comic.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.cad-comic.com/cad/20050304/#n629</a> [cad-comic.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dangerous perhaps , but if there 's a chance we can get Fantastic 4 like powers when it happens then I 'm in... well , unless I could turn into the Thing and that would just suck http : //www.cad-comic.com/cad/20050304/ # n629 [ cad-comic.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dangerous perhaps, but if there's a chance we can get Fantastic 4 like powers when it happens then I'm in... well, unless I could turn into the Thing and that would just suck http://www.cad-comic.com/cad/20050304/#n629 [cad-comic.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170932</id>
	<title>It's not about a velocity of light speed</title>
	<author>BadAnalogyGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1265045880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Spacetime is curved, so even if the ship is traveling at 15mph, it reaches its destination in a time indicating FTL travel. The actual distance traveled is much shorter, though.</p><p>This is the stuff you should already know before you apply to Starfleet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spacetime is curved , so even if the ship is traveling at 15mph , it reaches its destination in a time indicating FTL travel .
The actual distance traveled is much shorter , though.This is the stuff you should already know before you apply to Starfleet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spacetime is curved, so even if the ship is traveling at 15mph, it reaches its destination in a time indicating FTL travel.
The actual distance traveled is much shorter, though.This is the stuff you should already know before you apply to Starfleet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862</id>
	<title>Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265045700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>
After reading the article (yeah, I know...) tow thought spring to mind...
<br> <br>
1) Warp drive doesn't posit a traditional "go-very-fast-through-normal-space" type of spacecraft engine - it warps[*] space-time (hence the name!) in front of and behind the spacecraft - see <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre\_drive" title="wikipedia.org">here</a> [wikipedia.org] for an explanation. The spacecraft itself is sitting in a bubble of normal space, possibly even at rest.
<br> <br>
2) Um, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bussard\_ramjet" title="wikipedia.org">ramjets</a> [wikipedia.org], anyone ?
<br> <br>
Seriously, any number of sci-fi authors have covered this problem in enormous detail over the last few decades
<br> <br>
Simon
<br> <br>
[*] And because this is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., I expect you all to forgive me for using the present tense here [grin]</htmltext>
<tokenext>After reading the article ( yeah , I know... ) tow thought spring to mind.. . 1 ) Warp drive does n't posit a traditional " go-very-fast-through-normal-space " type of spacecraft engine - it warps [ * ] space-time ( hence the name !
) in front of and behind the spacecraft - see here [ wikipedia.org ] for an explanation .
The spacecraft itself is sitting in a bubble of normal space , possibly even at rest .
2 ) Um , ramjets [ wikipedia.org ] , anyone ?
Seriously , any number of sci-fi authors have covered this problem in enormous detail over the last few decades Simon [ * ] And because this is /. , I expect you all to forgive me for using the present tense here [ grin ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
After reading the article (yeah, I know...) tow thought spring to mind...
 
1) Warp drive doesn't posit a traditional "go-very-fast-through-normal-space" type of spacecraft engine - it warps[*] space-time (hence the name!
) in front of and behind the spacecraft - see here [wikipedia.org] for an explanation.
The spacecraft itself is sitting in a bubble of normal space, possibly even at rest.
2) Um, ramjets [wikipedia.org], anyone ?
Seriously, any number of sci-fi authors have covered this problem in enormous detail over the last few decades
 
Simon
 
[*] And because this is /., I expect you all to forgive me for using the present tense here [grin]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31181118</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266524940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Any gas will leak out of any container in such a timeframe, and no plastic or rubber seal would last a fraction of the time necessary."</p><p>Gas pockets in ice cores or fossilized amber?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Any gas will leak out of any container in such a timeframe , and no plastic or rubber seal would last a fraction of the time necessary .
" Gas pockets in ice cores or fossilized amber ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Any gas will leak out of any container in such a timeframe, and no plastic or rubber seal would last a fraction of the time necessary.
"Gas pockets in ice cores or fossilized amber?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176540</id>
	<title>Re:What would happen?</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1265020860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's kind of like a high powered laser.  It doesn't so much cut holes in you as blow holes in you.  The beam itself would make a fairly small hole but the debris from those collisions would be like an explosion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's kind of like a high powered laser .
It does n't so much cut holes in you as blow holes in you .
The beam itself would make a fairly small hole but the debris from those collisions would be like an explosion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's kind of like a high powered laser.
It doesn't so much cut holes in you as blow holes in you.
The beam itself would make a fairly small hole but the debris from those collisions would be like an explosion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175970</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265018640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Personal pet peeve:<br>Tunnel vision with dictionaries.</p><p>Spelt (v): pt. and pp. of SPELL<br>Spelt (n): variety of wheat</p><p>It requires a special kind of selective reading to ignore applicable definitions while on a quest to "correct" someone.  A word cannot be confined exclusively to a single definition when there are many that may apply.</p><p>Yet you people do it all the time, in all kinds of discussions.  Most egregious violation: whining about the definition of the verb "steal".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Personal pet peeve : Tunnel vision with dictionaries.Spelt ( v ) : pt .
and pp .
of SPELLSpelt ( n ) : variety of wheatIt requires a special kind of selective reading to ignore applicable definitions while on a quest to " correct " someone .
A word can not be confined exclusively to a single definition when there are many that may apply.Yet you people do it all the time , in all kinds of discussions .
Most egregious violation : whining about the definition of the verb " steal " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personal pet peeve:Tunnel vision with dictionaries.Spelt (v): pt.
and pp.
of SPELLSpelt (n): variety of wheatIt requires a special kind of selective reading to ignore applicable definitions while on a quest to "correct" someone.
A word cannot be confined exclusively to a single definition when there are many that may apply.Yet you people do it all the time, in all kinds of discussions.
Most egregious violation: whining about the definition of the verb "steal".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173820</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265054640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's easy to dismiss the possibilities of the future when the technology hasn't been invented yet.</p><p>If you'd take a slightly more optimistic view of the possibilities that are yet to come, you might join the camp that actually wants humans to progress outside the confines of what is economically feasible.</p><p>Not everything in life, or humanity for that matter, should revolve around the almighty $. Pointing out the limitations of humanity doesn't change the landscape. It's like reminding us the Sun is in the sky.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's easy to dismiss the possibilities of the future when the technology has n't been invented yet.If you 'd take a slightly more optimistic view of the possibilities that are yet to come , you might join the camp that actually wants humans to progress outside the confines of what is economically feasible.Not everything in life , or humanity for that matter , should revolve around the almighty $ .
Pointing out the limitations of humanity does n't change the landscape .
It 's like reminding us the Sun is in the sky .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's easy to dismiss the possibilities of the future when the technology hasn't been invented yet.If you'd take a slightly more optimistic view of the possibilities that are yet to come, you might join the camp that actually wants humans to progress outside the confines of what is economically feasible.Not everything in life, or humanity for that matter, should revolve around the almighty $.
Pointing out the limitations of humanity doesn't change the landscape.
It's like reminding us the Sun is in the sky.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175740</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265017860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Accelerating to 99.999998\% of light speed in 3.5 hours would be a somewhat dizzying experience. Especially since you'd actually experience an acceleration equivalent to going to 5000 times light speed in a pure Newtonian universe. We're talking more than 500.000km/s^2 here -- or 50 million g.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Accelerating to 99.999998 \ % of light speed in 3.5 hours would be a somewhat dizzying experience .
Especially since you 'd actually experience an acceleration equivalent to going to 5000 times light speed in a pure Newtonian universe .
We 're talking more than 500.000km/s ^ 2 here -- or 50 million g .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Accelerating to 99.999998\% of light speed in 3.5 hours would be a somewhat dizzying experience.
Especially since you'd actually experience an acceleration equivalent to going to 5000 times light speed in a pure Newtonian universe.
We're talking more than 500.000km/s^2 here -- or 50 million g.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173174</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171272</id>
	<title>This is, of course, impossible.</title>
	<author>asdf7890</author>
	<datestamp>1265046840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is, of course, impossible - which is why the advertising executives of the star system of Bastablon came up with this slogan: "If you've done six impossible things this morning, why not round it off with breakfast at Milliways, the Restaurant at the End of the Universe?"</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is , of course , impossible - which is why the advertising executives of the star system of Bastablon came up with this slogan : " If you 've done six impossible things this morning , why not round it off with breakfast at Milliways , the Restaurant at the End of the Universe ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is, of course, impossible - which is why the advertising executives of the star system of Bastablon came up with this slogan: "If you've done six impossible things this morning, why not round it off with breakfast at Milliways, the Restaurant at the End of the Universe?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31185144</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>LINM</author>
	<datestamp>1266511380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is if you go with outdated technology.  Any interstellar traveler worth their dust would of course use a Cochran field generator.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is if you go with outdated technology .
Any interstellar traveler worth their dust would of course use a Cochran field generator .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is if you go with outdated technology.
Any interstellar traveler worth their dust would of course use a Cochran field generator.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173042</id>
	<title>big bang photons may limit cosmic ray speeds</title>
	<author>peter303</author>
	<datestamp>1265052000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Cosmic rays appear to have an energy ceiling of around 10^20 electron volts.  Thats 10 million times the maximum energy rating of the large hadron collider. This is a proton traveling at almost the speed of light up to eight decimal places. There have been various proposed explanations for this apparent ceiling ranging from inadequate high-energy cosmic ray detectors to no acceleration mechanism known for higher energies.  But the most plausible explanation cosmic rays rarely interact with big bang photons or vacuum virtual photons which slows them down.  The theoretical numbers tend to agree.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Cosmic rays appear to have an energy ceiling of around 10 ^ 20 electron volts .
Thats 10 million times the maximum energy rating of the large hadron collider .
This is a proton traveling at almost the speed of light up to eight decimal places .
There have been various proposed explanations for this apparent ceiling ranging from inadequate high-energy cosmic ray detectors to no acceleration mechanism known for higher energies .
But the most plausible explanation cosmic rays rarely interact with big bang photons or vacuum virtual photons which slows them down .
The theoretical numbers tend to agree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cosmic rays appear to have an energy ceiling of around 10^20 electron volts.
Thats 10 million times the maximum energy rating of the large hadron collider.
This is a proton traveling at almost the speed of light up to eight decimal places.
There have been various proposed explanations for this apparent ceiling ranging from inadequate high-energy cosmic ray detectors to no acceleration mechanism known for higher energies.
But the most plausible explanation cosmic rays rarely interact with big bang photons or vacuum virtual photons which slows them down.
The theoretical numbers tend to agree.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31180820</id>
	<title>not necessarily Physician or physicist</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265051280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, from the article's links, he's a <a href="http://www.mri.jhu.edu/~edelstei/" title="jhu.edu" rel="nofollow">phd working with MRI technology</a> [jhu.edu]. i.e. he's most likely a physicist, not a physician. Though no doubt he has a certain amount of cross domain knowledge.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , from the article 's links , he 's a phd working with MRI technology [ jhu.edu ] .
i.e. he 's most likely a physicist , not a physician .
Though no doubt he has a certain amount of cross domain knowledge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, from the article's links, he's a phd working with MRI technology [jhu.edu].
i.e. he's most likely a physicist, not a physician.
Though no doubt he has a certain amount of cross domain knowledge.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172112</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>martas</author>
	<datestamp>1265049240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>you're the kind of guy who predicts that nobody would ever need more than 640k of memory, aren't you? or that airplanes have no military applications whatsoever? or that everything that can be invented, has been invented? (the last 2 are from the 19th century, if i'm not mistaken)</htmltext>
<tokenext>you 're the kind of guy who predicts that nobody would ever need more than 640k of memory , are n't you ?
or that airplanes have no military applications whatsoever ?
or that everything that can be invented , has been invented ?
( the last 2 are from the 19th century , if i 'm not mistaken )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you're the kind of guy who predicts that nobody would ever need more than 640k of memory, aren't you?
or that airplanes have no military applications whatsoever?
or that everything that can be invented, has been invented?
(the last 2 are from the 19th century, if i'm not mistaken)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174202</id>
	<title>Re:Physician, not physicist</title>
	<author>garompeta</author>
	<datestamp>1265055900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bush: "hehe, for some of this question you got to be a rocket surgeon"
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P52bmJXYQPQ" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P52bmJXYQPQ</a> [youtube.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bush : " hehe , for some of this question you got to be a rocket surgeon " http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = P52bmJXYQPQ [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bush: "hehe, for some of this question you got to be a rocket surgeon"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P52bmJXYQPQ [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171406</id>
	<title>Ionized hydrogen?</title>
	<author>durrr</author>
	<datestamp>1265047200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wouldn't the hydrogen exist in ionized forms, and thus be possible to divert by electric fields? A 99.999\% spaceship would probably have enough of an energy supply to power the LHC a few times over and thus be able to shield the significant part of the craft from any LHC strenght radiation?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would n't the hydrogen exist in ionized forms , and thus be possible to divert by electric fields ?
A 99.999 \ % spaceship would probably have enough of an energy supply to power the LHC a few times over and thus be able to shield the significant part of the craft from any LHC strenght radiation ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wouldn't the hydrogen exist in ionized forms, and thus be possible to divert by electric fields?
A 99.999\% spaceship would probably have enough of an energy supply to power the LHC a few times over and thus be able to shield the significant part of the craft from any LHC strenght radiation?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174916</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>OctaviusIII</author>
	<datestamp>1265015220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Close!  The deflector field is specially tuned to deflect anything except for a certain number of hydrogen atoms per second, adjusting itself based on the ship's needs and with safeties in place.  The ramscoop would divert hydrogen atoms that are allowed through the field to the engines and storage tanks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Close !
The deflector field is specially tuned to deflect anything except for a certain number of hydrogen atoms per second , adjusting itself based on the ship 's needs and with safeties in place .
The ramscoop would divert hydrogen atoms that are allowed through the field to the engines and storage tanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Close!
The deflector field is specially tuned to deflect anything except for a certain number of hydrogen atoms per second, adjusting itself based on the ship's needs and with safeties in place.
The ramscoop would divert hydrogen atoms that are allowed through the field to the engines and storage tanks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171292</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265046900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>UM, I thought the plan was to scoop them up and use them for fuel, ie. you WANT those hydrogen atoms to pile up in front of the ship.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>UM , I thought the plan was to scoop them up and use them for fuel , ie .
you WANT those hydrogen atoms to pile up in front of the ship .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>UM, I thought the plan was to scoop them up and use them for fuel, ie.
you WANT those hydrogen atoms to pile up in front of the ship.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171146</id>
	<title>Eggheads Love This Hooey</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265046480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I however, do not.  Let's try to build a ship that can get to mars with 1G constant acceleration/decceleration first. And let's figure out how to install some fairly massive shielding against the already damaging background radiation in our non-relativistic vehicle.  These problem is hard enough.</p><p>Eggheads get all excited about another order of magnitude or another significant digit.  Yeah, they are out there at the edge of human knowledge expanding the boundaries. Great. Applications need to catch up with them quite a lot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I however , do not .
Let 's try to build a ship that can get to mars with 1G constant acceleration/decceleration first .
And let 's figure out how to install some fairly massive shielding against the already damaging background radiation in our non-relativistic vehicle .
These problem is hard enough.Eggheads get all excited about another order of magnitude or another significant digit .
Yeah , they are out there at the edge of human knowledge expanding the boundaries .
Great. Applications need to catch up with them quite a lot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I however, do not.
Let's try to build a ship that can get to mars with 1G constant acceleration/decceleration first.
And let's figure out how to install some fairly massive shielding against the already damaging background radiation in our non-relativistic vehicle.
These problem is hard enough.Eggheads get all excited about another order of magnitude or another significant digit.
Yeah, they are out there at the edge of human knowledge expanding the boundaries.
Great. Applications need to catch up with them quite a lot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172372</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>LWATCDR</author>
	<datestamp>1265050080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes it has been covered in many sci-fi stories because real physicist and scientists like yourself read those stories. The then write the author who as a who have a real love of science add them to future stores.</p><p>As your spelling error I didn't notice. You see I unlike a lot of people have a high enough IQ that I can skill over and correct minor errors in spelling and grammar on the fly.  It must be terrible to have such a limited IQ that such little errors cause people to miss the content of the message.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes it has been covered in many sci-fi stories because real physicist and scientists like yourself read those stories .
The then write the author who as a who have a real love of science add them to future stores.As your spelling error I did n't notice .
You see I unlike a lot of people have a high enough IQ that I can skill over and correct minor errors in spelling and grammar on the fly .
It must be terrible to have such a limited IQ that such little errors cause people to miss the content of the message .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes it has been covered in many sci-fi stories because real physicist and scientists like yourself read those stories.
The then write the author who as a who have a real love of science add them to future stores.As your spelling error I didn't notice.
You see I unlike a lot of people have a high enough IQ that I can skill over and correct minor errors in spelling and grammar on the fly.
It must be terrible to have such a limited IQ that such little errors cause people to miss the content of the message.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178106</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265027340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which one applies? Does the observer in the space ship feel the g-force of accelerating in 3.5 hours, or the g-force of accelerating in 2.2 years? Though I suspect both would be more than an individual could handle. Sounds like we're going to need inertial dampeners for people to handle the trip.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which one applies ?
Does the observer in the space ship feel the g-force of accelerating in 3.5 hours , or the g-force of accelerating in 2.2 years ?
Though I suspect both would be more than an individual could handle .
Sounds like we 're going to need inertial dampeners for people to handle the trip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which one applies?
Does the observer in the space ship feel the g-force of accelerating in 3.5 hours, or the g-force of accelerating in 2.2 years?
Though I suspect both would be more than an individual could handle.
Sounds like we're going to need inertial dampeners for people to handle the trip.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31177720</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1265025480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Reversing the polarity of the inertial dampers should compensate for any excess tachyon radiation encountered when speeds exceed warp two.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reversing the polarity of the inertial dampers should compensate for any excess tachyon radiation encountered when speeds exceed warp two .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reversing the polarity of the inertial dampers should compensate for any excess tachyon radiation encountered when speeds exceed warp two.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174210</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>chromas</author>
	<datestamp>1265055960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I cringt as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I cringt as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I cringt as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176744</id>
	<title>Re:True, But Irrelevant...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265021700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>....We need warp drive, subspace, wormholes, or something else<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</p><p>All of the posts on this subject make the assumptions of a Western scientific/materialistic worldview. There are other views, such as the Bible for example, which open other possibilities for exploring the universe.</p><p>The first and foremost problem to overcome is physical mortality. Jesus Christ claimed to be God and proved this claim by overcoming death. As far as I'm concerned, that would be a prerequisite to being able to explore the vast universe.</p><p>The second problem is to get rid of the limitation of mass. This means that a complex material spaceship would not be needed, in order to leave the earth for other worlds. Read the account of the ascension of Jesus Christ. He did not need a fiery rocket or other kind of vehicle to simply depart the surface of the earth to travel to another world.</p><p>Science has conditioned us to only think in terms of the physical, material part of reality. Einstein taught us that the speed of light is a physical limitation because of energy and mass. He also taught us that matter and energy are directly interchangeable. He had nothing to say on the speed of thought. Does gravity have a speed limit and could it be reversible given the right conditions? We read in the Bible about God and the spirit world and its inhabitants of demons and angels. These cannot be perceived by science. Does that mean they don't exist?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>....We need warp drive , subspace , wormholes , or something else ....All of the posts on this subject make the assumptions of a Western scientific/materialistic worldview .
There are other views , such as the Bible for example , which open other possibilities for exploring the universe.The first and foremost problem to overcome is physical mortality .
Jesus Christ claimed to be God and proved this claim by overcoming death .
As far as I 'm concerned , that would be a prerequisite to being able to explore the vast universe.The second problem is to get rid of the limitation of mass .
This means that a complex material spaceship would not be needed , in order to leave the earth for other worlds .
Read the account of the ascension of Jesus Christ .
He did not need a fiery rocket or other kind of vehicle to simply depart the surface of the earth to travel to another world.Science has conditioned us to only think in terms of the physical , material part of reality .
Einstein taught us that the speed of light is a physical limitation because of energy and mass .
He also taught us that matter and energy are directly interchangeable .
He had nothing to say on the speed of thought .
Does gravity have a speed limit and could it be reversible given the right conditions ?
We read in the Bible about God and the spirit world and its inhabitants of demons and angels .
These can not be perceived by science .
Does that mean they do n't exist ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>....We need warp drive, subspace, wormholes, or something else ....All of the posts on this subject make the assumptions of a Western scientific/materialistic worldview.
There are other views, such as the Bible for example, which open other possibilities for exploring the universe.The first and foremost problem to overcome is physical mortality.
Jesus Christ claimed to be God and proved this claim by overcoming death.
As far as I'm concerned, that would be a prerequisite to being able to explore the vast universe.The second problem is to get rid of the limitation of mass.
This means that a complex material spaceship would not be needed, in order to leave the earth for other worlds.
Read the account of the ascension of Jesus Christ.
He did not need a fiery rocket or other kind of vehicle to simply depart the surface of the earth to travel to another world.Science has conditioned us to only think in terms of the physical, material part of reality.
Einstein taught us that the speed of light is a physical limitation because of energy and mass.
He also taught us that matter and energy are directly interchangeable.
He had nothing to say on the speed of thought.
Does gravity have a speed limit and could it be reversible given the right conditions?
We read in the Bible about God and the spirit world and its inhabitants of demons and angels.
These cannot be perceived by science.
Does that mean they don't exist?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31177274</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>Werrismys</author>
	<datestamp>1265023920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why <b>would</b> you go that fast (presuming you can't go much <i>faster</i>, of course)?  It takes exponentially more energy to</p></div><p>The problem is not the energy, the problem is the time dilatation.
Once you go near-c, you can as well go very near c since you're dead to everyone you knew.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would you go that fast ( presuming you ca n't go much faster , of course ) ?
It takes exponentially more energy toThe problem is not the energy , the problem is the time dilatation .
Once you go near-c , you can as well go very near c since you 're dead to everyone you knew .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would you go that fast (presuming you can't go much faster, of course)?
It takes exponentially more energy toThe problem is not the energy, the problem is the time dilatation.
Once you go near-c, you can as well go very near c since you're dead to everyone you knew.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171754</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>IT Slave</author>
	<datestamp>1265048220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually folding of space is more likely to happen than anything else so there is not actual speed involved...Duh!!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually folding of space is more likely to happen than anything else so there is not actual speed involved...Duh ! ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually folding of space is more likely to happen than anything else so there is not actual speed involved...Duh!!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172462</id>
	<title>Re:Same ol' same ol'</title>
	<author>maxwell demon</author>
	<datestamp>1265050320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>{{citation needed}}</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>{ { citation needed } }</tokentext>
<sentencetext>{{citation needed}}</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848</id>
	<title>Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>jim\_v2000</author>
	<datestamp>1265045700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's what the deflector array is for.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's what the deflector array is for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's what the deflector array is for.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170928</id>
	<title>Scientist-Schmientist</title>
	<author>PolyDwarf</author>
	<datestamp>1265045880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Hydrogen atoms are unavoidable space mines."</p></div><p>Uhh.. Hey, Mr. Scientist... Ever hear of deflector shields?  GOSH!</p><p>Going out on a (geeky) limb... Don't warp drives (again, geek-out time, so just accept they exist a la Star Trek) make a bubble that the ship moves through that goes faster than light, instead of accelerating the ship up to and beyond light speed?  I believe I've read that Einstein's theories technically allow for something moving faster than light, if that something can manage to alter their local space-time?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Hydrogen atoms are unavoidable space mines. " Uhh. .
Hey , Mr. Scientist... Ever hear of deflector shields ?
GOSH ! Going out on a ( geeky ) limb... Do n't warp drives ( again , geek-out time , so just accept they exist a la Star Trek ) make a bubble that the ship moves through that goes faster than light , instead of accelerating the ship up to and beyond light speed ?
I believe I 've read that Einstein 's theories technically allow for something moving faster than light , if that something can manage to alter their local space-time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Hydrogen atoms are unavoidable space mines."Uhh..
Hey, Mr. Scientist... Ever hear of deflector shields?
GOSH!Going out on a (geeky) limb... Don't warp drives (again, geek-out time, so just accept they exist a la Star Trek) make a bubble that the ship moves through that goes faster than light, instead of accelerating the ship up to and beyond light speed?
I believe I've read that Einstein's theories technically allow for something moving faster than light, if that something can manage to alter their local space-time?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171220</id>
	<title>Easily fixed!</title>
	<author>get quad</author>
	<datestamp>1265046720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about a giant windshield wiper wiping slightly faster than the speed of light? amirite? amirite?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about a giant windshield wiper wiping slightly faster than the speed of light ?
amirite ? amirite ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about a giant windshield wiper wiping slightly faster than the speed of light?
amirite? amirite?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172246</id>
	<title>Two words</title>
	<author>SR-DUB</author>
	<datestamp>1265049660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>

Deflector shield.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Deflector shield .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>

Deflector shield.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170844</id>
	<title>old news...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265045700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They already figured this out nearly a hundred years ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They already figured this out nearly a hundred years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They already figured this out nearly a hundred years ago.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171938</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265048700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hell if what he's saying is true, you could use the hydrogen for fuel and power the internals of the ship off the charge collecting on the front of it somehow!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hell if what he 's saying is true , you could use the hydrogen for fuel and power the internals of the ship off the charge collecting on the front of it somehow !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hell if what he's saying is true, you could use the hydrogen for fuel and power the internals of the ship off the charge collecting on the front of it somehow!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171924</id>
	<title>my proposition</title>
	<author>corbettw</author>
	<datestamp>1265048640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's an old saying, nothing focuses the mind like a firing squad. When faced with imminent death, humans are famously adept at coming up with novel solutions to complex problems. To that end, I propose we gather a collection of prominent physicists and place them in a ship capable of accelerating to near-light speed over a period of some years. Put locks on the controls so that they are unable to halt or alter the acceleration, then inform they have X years to come up with a way to avoid being smashed to death by interstellar gasses. Either they come up with a solution and are all saved, or they perish in a fiery ball of glory. Either way, they'll probably all have high schools named after them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's an old saying , nothing focuses the mind like a firing squad .
When faced with imminent death , humans are famously adept at coming up with novel solutions to complex problems .
To that end , I propose we gather a collection of prominent physicists and place them in a ship capable of accelerating to near-light speed over a period of some years .
Put locks on the controls so that they are unable to halt or alter the acceleration , then inform they have X years to come up with a way to avoid being smashed to death by interstellar gasses .
Either they come up with a solution and are all saved , or they perish in a fiery ball of glory .
Either way , they 'll probably all have high schools named after them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's an old saying, nothing focuses the mind like a firing squad.
When faced with imminent death, humans are famously adept at coming up with novel solutions to complex problems.
To that end, I propose we gather a collection of prominent physicists and place them in a ship capable of accelerating to near-light speed over a period of some years.
Put locks on the controls so that they are unable to halt or alter the acceleration, then inform they have X years to come up with a way to avoid being smashed to death by interstellar gasses.
Either they come up with a solution and are all saved, or they perish in a fiery ball of glory.
Either way, they'll probably all have high schools named after them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31177372</id>
	<title>MEDICINE !</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265024340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since when does Medicine have anything to do with Space Flight</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since when does Medicine have anything to do with Space Flight</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since when does Medicine have anything to do with Space Flight</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172668</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>CorporateSuit</author>
	<datestamp>1265050920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>We could just build the spaceships out of inside-out LHC tunnels!</htmltext>
<tokenext>We could just build the spaceships out of inside-out LHC tunnels !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We could just build the spaceships out of inside-out LHC tunnels!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173942</id>
	<title>Are you deef, man?</title>
	<author>A nonymous Coward</author>
	<datestamp>1265055120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the changes I have noticed over many years of using English is that the better sounding more poetic words have dropped out of usage.  "A well-lit room", "her face lit up" were standard usage.  Nowadays everyone says "lighted" and it grates on my ears.</p><p>Same with "spelled" vs "spelt".  Sometimes the softer "t" simply sounds better than the harder "d".</p><p>Japanese does this too.  "Sa-n" is three, "hyaku" is hundred, but three hundred is "sambyaku" simply because it sounds better and is easier to say.</p><p>I imagine every language does it in one way or another.</p><p>Anyone who pays the slightest attention to harmonious sounds can pick these changes up as a matter of course.</p><p>This can only mean that you are deaf to the pleasures of spoken languages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the changes I have noticed over many years of using English is that the better sounding more poetic words have dropped out of usage .
" A well-lit room " , " her face lit up " were standard usage .
Nowadays everyone says " lighted " and it grates on my ears.Same with " spelled " vs " spelt " .
Sometimes the softer " t " simply sounds better than the harder " d " .Japanese does this too .
" Sa-n " is three , " hyaku " is hundred , but three hundred is " sambyaku " simply because it sounds better and is easier to say.I imagine every language does it in one way or another.Anyone who pays the slightest attention to harmonious sounds can pick these changes up as a matter of course.This can only mean that you are deaf to the pleasures of spoken languages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the changes I have noticed over many years of using English is that the better sounding more poetic words have dropped out of usage.
"A well-lit room", "her face lit up" were standard usage.
Nowadays everyone says "lighted" and it grates on my ears.Same with "spelled" vs "spelt".
Sometimes the softer "t" simply sounds better than the harder "d".Japanese does this too.
"Sa-n" is three, "hyaku" is hundred, but three hundred is "sambyaku" simply because it sounds better and is easier to say.I imagine every language does it in one way or another.Anyone who pays the slightest attention to harmonious sounds can pick these changes up as a matter of course.This can only mean that you are deaf to the pleasures of spoken languages.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31200516</id>
	<title>Tax dollars at work</title>
	<author>AmericanInKiev</author>
	<datestamp>1266600720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good to see where our tax dollars are going. Where would this country be if we didn't rule out speed of light travel?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good to see where our tax dollars are going .
Where would this country be if we did n't rule out speed of light travel ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good to see where our tax dollars are going.
Where would this country be if we didn't rule out speed of light travel?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172990</id>
	<title>Matters not</title>
	<author>Bruha</author>
	<datestamp>1265051820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There becomes a speed that our bodies would not survive the tidal forces of nearby gravity fields you may pass through on your journey.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There becomes a speed that our bodies would not survive the tidal forces of nearby gravity fields you may pass through on your journey .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There becomes a speed that our bodies would not survive the tidal forces of nearby gravity fields you may pass through on your journey.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172070</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>mseidl</author>
	<datestamp>1265049120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I like the tan I get in the lhc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like the tan I get in the lhc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like the tan I get in the lhc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171680</id>
	<title>as long as it doesn't prevent</title>
	<author>obarthelemy</author>
	<datestamp>1265048040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the Improbality Drive, we're all good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the Improbality Drive , we 're all good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the Improbality Drive, we're all good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171128</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>Frosty Piss</author>
	<datestamp>1265046420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Seriously, any number of sci-fi authors have covered this problem in enormous detail over the last few decades</p></div><p>Sci-Fi <i> <b>AUTHORS</b> </i>.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , any number of sci-fi authors have covered this problem in enormous detail over the last few decadesSci-Fi AUTHORS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, any number of sci-fi authors have covered this problem in enormous detail over the last few decadesSci-Fi  AUTHORS .
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174688</id>
	<title>The math</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265057580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Traveling at a constant acceleration of g, you will reach the speed (1-2E-8)*c in about 9 years and have traveled 5000 light years.</p><p>Traveling at a constant acceleration, a, you will reach the speed (1-e)*c in about a time c/(2a) * ln(2/e) and have traveled a distance of (c^2/a) sqrt(2/e).</p><p>By the way, speeds closer to c are better not only because you are going faster but because of time dilation.  In the above example, you have aged 9 years, but traveled 5000 light years -- it is "as if" you were going faster than light because of the quirky way relativity works.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Traveling at a constant acceleration of g , you will reach the speed ( 1-2E-8 ) * c in about 9 years and have traveled 5000 light years.Traveling at a constant acceleration , a , you will reach the speed ( 1-e ) * c in about a time c/ ( 2a ) * ln ( 2/e ) and have traveled a distance of ( c ^ 2/a ) sqrt ( 2/e ) .By the way , speeds closer to c are better not only because you are going faster but because of time dilation .
In the above example , you have aged 9 years , but traveled 5000 light years -- it is " as if " you were going faster than light because of the quirky way relativity works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Traveling at a constant acceleration of g, you will reach the speed (1-2E-8)*c in about 9 years and have traveled 5000 light years.Traveling at a constant acceleration, a, you will reach the speed (1-e)*c in about a time c/(2a) * ln(2/e) and have traveled a distance of (c^2/a) sqrt(2/e).By the way, speeds closer to c are better not only because you are going faster but because of time dilation.
In the above example, you have aged 9 years, but traveled 5000 light years -- it is "as if" you were going faster than light because of the quirky way relativity works.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178834</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>DrCode</author>
	<datestamp>1265032200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay, so it's a solved problem.  Now all we have to do is find a source of dilithium and we're good to go!:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , so it 's a solved problem .
Now all we have to do is find a source of dilithium and we 're good to go !
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, so it's a solved problem.
Now all we have to do is find a source of dilithium and we're good to go!
:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173758</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265054460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Fermi Paradox assumes that advance civilizations have the same goals as primitive civilizations. I think the probability is small that 100\% of all civilization die some horrible death right before they achieve intersellar flight. I believe there are only two probable answers: 1) There is a civilization that is destroying other civilizations right before they achieve interstellar flight or all civilizations find some other goal that is far more interesting. I vote for the far more interesting goal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Fermi Paradox assumes that advance civilizations have the same goals as primitive civilizations .
I think the probability is small that 100 \ % of all civilization die some horrible death right before they achieve intersellar flight .
I believe there are only two probable answers : 1 ) There is a civilization that is destroying other civilizations right before they achieve interstellar flight or all civilizations find some other goal that is far more interesting .
I vote for the far more interesting goal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Fermi Paradox assumes that advance civilizations have the same goals as primitive civilizations.
I think the probability is small that 100\% of all civilization die some horrible death right before they achieve intersellar flight.
I believe there are only two probable answers: 1) There is a civilization that is destroying other civilizations right before they achieve interstellar flight or all civilizations find some other goal that is far more interesting.
I vote for the far more interesting goal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175640</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>KingTank</author>
	<datestamp>1265017560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And I was just about to get into my 99.999998\% lightspeed spaceship.</p></div><p>Yeah, sounds worse than the Toyota recall, huh?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And I was just about to get into my 99.999998 \ % lightspeed spaceship.Yeah , sounds worse than the Toyota recall , huh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I was just about to get into my 99.999998\% lightspeed spaceship.Yeah, sounds worse than the Toyota recall, huh?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174830</id>
	<title>Poul Anderson's Tau Zero</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265014920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone interested in this subject might want to read the science fiction novel Tau Zero by Poul Anderson.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone interested in this subject might want to read the science fiction novel Tau Zero by Poul Anderson .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone interested in this subject might want to read the science fiction novel Tau Zero by Poul Anderson.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176690</id>
	<title>Sometimes</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1265021460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Professor William Edelstein of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine"</p><p>Sometimes an outsider notices something that everyone in a field really has overlooked, simply because they lack a fresh perspective.  More often, the outsider is (a) mistaken, (b) just thinks he's found something worth noting because it's so obvious to everyone else that they don't bother mentioning it or (c) a combination of both.</p><p>This appears to be a case of (c).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Professor William Edelstein of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine " Sometimes an outsider notices something that everyone in a field really has overlooked , simply because they lack a fresh perspective .
More often , the outsider is ( a ) mistaken , ( b ) just thinks he 's found something worth noting because it 's so obvious to everyone else that they do n't bother mentioning it or ( c ) a combination of both.This appears to be a case of ( c ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Professor William Edelstein of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine"Sometimes an outsider notices something that everyone in a field really has overlooked, simply because they lack a fresh perspective.
More often, the outsider is (a) mistaken, (b) just thinks he's found something worth noting because it's so obvious to everyone else that they don't bother mentioning it or (c) a combination of both.This appears to be a case of (c).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173398</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>Zordak</author>
	<datestamp>1265053200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why would you go that fast (presuming you can't go much faster, of course)? It takes exponentially more energy to accelerate as you approach the speed of light, but that doesn't get you to your destination all that much faster. At a mere 99.9\% of the speed of light, you spend less than one extra hour of travel (externally measured, of course) per month. For a "realistic" trip to nearby stars, that means an extra day and a half out of the 4.37 years to get to Alpha Centauri.</p></div><p>The issue is not the time for an external observer, it's the time for the folks in the ship.  The same exponential increase in energy also equals an exponential <em>decrease</em> in time that you, the astronaut, have to spend cooped up in a ship.  I remember reading somewhere that if you could keep accelerating so that the internal observer experienced a constant 1g, you could traverse the visible universe in something like a month (feel free to correct me if you have done the actual math).  Sure, the rest of the universe will grow old around you, but in the meantime, you only had to pack one bag.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would you go that fast ( presuming you ca n't go much faster , of course ) ?
It takes exponentially more energy to accelerate as you approach the speed of light , but that does n't get you to your destination all that much faster .
At a mere 99.9 \ % of the speed of light , you spend less than one extra hour of travel ( externally measured , of course ) per month .
For a " realistic " trip to nearby stars , that means an extra day and a half out of the 4.37 years to get to Alpha Centauri.The issue is not the time for an external observer , it 's the time for the folks in the ship .
The same exponential increase in energy also equals an exponential decrease in time that you , the astronaut , have to spend cooped up in a ship .
I remember reading somewhere that if you could keep accelerating so that the internal observer experienced a constant 1g , you could traverse the visible universe in something like a month ( feel free to correct me if you have done the actual math ) .
Sure , the rest of the universe will grow old around you , but in the meantime , you only had to pack one bag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would you go that fast (presuming you can't go much faster, of course)?
It takes exponentially more energy to accelerate as you approach the speed of light, but that doesn't get you to your destination all that much faster.
At a mere 99.9\% of the speed of light, you spend less than one extra hour of travel (externally measured, of course) per month.
For a "realistic" trip to nearby stars, that means an extra day and a half out of the 4.37 years to get to Alpha Centauri.The issue is not the time for an external observer, it's the time for the folks in the ship.
The same exponential increase in energy also equals an exponential decrease in time that you, the astronaut, have to spend cooped up in a ship.
I remember reading somewhere that if you could keep accelerating so that the internal observer experienced a constant 1g, you could traverse the visible universe in something like a month (feel free to correct me if you have done the actual math).
Sure, the rest of the universe will grow old around you, but in the meantime, you only had to pack one bag.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171228</id>
	<title>Important fact missing</title>
	<author>alewar</author>
	<datestamp>1265046720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>According to the theories developed by Tessa Wendel, once you are traveling faster than the speed of light the nature of gravity changes from attraction to repulsion. This means that a spaceship traveling that fast would be effectively shielded from small objects by the gravitational force.</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to the theories developed by Tessa Wendel , once you are traveling faster than the speed of light the nature of gravity changes from attraction to repulsion .
This means that a spaceship traveling that fast would be effectively shielded from small objects by the gravitational force .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to the theories developed by Tessa Wendel, once you are traveling faster than the speed of light the nature of gravity changes from attraction to repulsion.
This means that a spaceship traveling that fast would be effectively shielded from small objects by the gravitational force.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171722</id>
	<title>The Galactic Patrol</title>
	<author>UberMunchkin</author>
	<datestamp>1265048100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Didn't E.E Smith talk about this years ago in the Lensman books.  I'm pretty sure the Galactic Patrol moved on tear-drop shaped warships over their original spheres purely because their intertialess drive allowed them to move so fast the the occurrences of interstellar hydrogen atoms began to act on the hulls as friction and slowed them down.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't E.E Smith talk about this years ago in the Lensman books .
I 'm pretty sure the Galactic Patrol moved on tear-drop shaped warships over their original spheres purely because their intertialess drive allowed them to move so fast the the occurrences of interstellar hydrogen atoms began to act on the hulls as friction and slowed them down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't E.E Smith talk about this years ago in the Lensman books.
I'm pretty sure the Galactic Patrol moved on tear-drop shaped warships over their original spheres purely because their intertialess drive allowed them to move so fast the the occurrences of interstellar hydrogen atoms began to act on the hulls as friction and slowed them down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31194904</id>
	<title>At reasonable speeds (such as .99c)...</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1266507660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...A thick block of tungsten will do as a shield (it'll get red hot).  Make your ship long and skinny to minimize weight.  Note that there is no point in any sort of aerodynamic shaping.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...A thick block of tungsten will do as a shield ( it 'll get red hot ) .
Make your ship long and skinny to minimize weight .
Note that there is no point in any sort of aerodynamic shaping .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...A thick block of tungsten will do as a shield (it'll get red hot).
Make your ship long and skinny to minimize weight.
Note that there is no point in any sort of aerodynamic shaping.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174434</id>
	<title>You forgot to account for relativity.</title>
	<author>microbox</author>
	<datestamp>1265056740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually you are missing something very important in your maths: relativity. It doesn't take much shorter to get to the destination from the perspective of someone on earth, but the tale is different for the people on the spaceship. The distance to the destination shrinks. <br>
<br>
Sagan talks about this in Cosmos. If a theoretical spaceship accelerated constantly, it could traverse the entire universe in a mere 50 years -- but by the time it returned earth would be long gone.<br>
<br>
Conceptually -- the universe has no "size" for a photon in a perfect vacuum. From the point of view of this theoretical photon, it is created in a distant star and intersects with your eye instantaneously. From our point of view it could take millions of years.<br>
<br>
Considering that mass is what prevents light-speed travel (as well as the density of the medium being travelled through), that implies an interesting relationship between space-time and the higgs boson.<br>
<br>
The universe is stranger than any fiction.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually you are missing something very important in your maths : relativity .
It does n't take much shorter to get to the destination from the perspective of someone on earth , but the tale is different for the people on the spaceship .
The distance to the destination shrinks .
Sagan talks about this in Cosmos .
If a theoretical spaceship accelerated constantly , it could traverse the entire universe in a mere 50 years -- but by the time it returned earth would be long gone .
Conceptually -- the universe has no " size " for a photon in a perfect vacuum .
From the point of view of this theoretical photon , it is created in a distant star and intersects with your eye instantaneously .
From our point of view it could take millions of years .
Considering that mass is what prevents light-speed travel ( as well as the density of the medium being travelled through ) , that implies an interesting relationship between space-time and the higgs boson .
The universe is stranger than any fiction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually you are missing something very important in your maths: relativity.
It doesn't take much shorter to get to the destination from the perspective of someone on earth, but the tale is different for the people on the spaceship.
The distance to the destination shrinks.
Sagan talks about this in Cosmos.
If a theoretical spaceship accelerated constantly, it could traverse the entire universe in a mere 50 years -- but by the time it returned earth would be long gone.
Conceptually -- the universe has no "size" for a photon in a perfect vacuum.
From the point of view of this theoretical photon, it is created in a distant star and intersects with your eye instantaneously.
From our point of view it could take millions of years.
Considering that mass is what prevents light-speed travel (as well as the density of the medium being travelled through), that implies an interesting relationship between space-time and the higgs boson.
The universe is stranger than any fiction.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170872</id>
	<title>Let's just hope...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265045760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's just hope the engine controls aren't made by Toyota, or it'll be hitting that speed whether the crew want or not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's just hope the engine controls are n't made by Toyota , or it 'll be hitting that speed whether the crew want or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's just hope the engine controls aren't made by Toyota, or it'll be hitting that speed whether the crew want or not.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31189400</id>
	<title>The Einsteinian DILLEMA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266526440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As the speed of the ship INCREASES its MASS INCREASES, therefore DOES NOT THE POWER AND EFFICIENCY OF THE FUEL OF THE SHIP AND ITS ENGINES ALSO INCREASE<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... therefore, GOD WAAAAAASSS the BIG BANG and the first consciousness to approach the speed of light in a ship, (It quickly accelerated to maximum density and then exploded creating the universe sized time rift which now we are all trapped in !?!?!?!?!?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As the speed of the ship INCREASES its MASS INCREASES , therefore DOES NOT THE POWER AND EFFICIENCY OF THE FUEL OF THE SHIP AND ITS ENGINES ALSO INCREASE ... ... therefore , GOD WAAAAAASSS the BIG BANG and the first consciousness to approach the speed of light in a ship , ( It quickly accelerated to maximum density and then exploded creating the universe sized time rift which now we are all trapped in ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As the speed of the ship INCREASES its MASS INCREASES, therefore DOES NOT THE POWER AND EFFICIENCY OF THE FUEL OF THE SHIP AND ITS ENGINES ALSO INCREASE ... ... therefore, GOD WAAAAAASSS the BIG BANG and the first consciousness to approach the speed of light in a ship, (It quickly accelerated to maximum density and then exploded creating the universe sized time rift which now we are all trapped in !?!?!?!?!?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173304</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>dmartin</author>
	<datestamp>1265052900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It really depends on what you think is relevant. For example if the purpose is to do research for people on Earth, you probably are interested (at least in part) in the time taken for the round trip, and how long people on Earth have to wait to see the benefits of their investment. If you are looking at colonization then you are probably more interested in the amount of time as experienced by the people travelling on the ship. In this case the difference between 99.9\% of the speed of light, and 99.99\% of the speed of light is significant.</p><p>To make the example concrete, let us take your example of Alpha Centuri:<br>Distance: ~ 4 light-years.</p><ul><li> <b>99.9\% of the speed of light:</b><br>Time (Earth observer): 4 years and 1.5 days<br>Gamma factor*: 22.4<br>Time (Ship observer): 65 days </li><li> <b>99.99\% of the speed of light:</b><br>Time (Earth observer): 4 years and part of a day.<br>Gamma factor*: 70.7<br>Time (Ship observer): 20.5 days.</li></ul><p>So from the point of view of the *crew* the journey takes about a third the time, although from Earth you are correct in stating they are essentially the same.</p><p>* The gamma factor, or time dilation factor (or length contraction factor), is given by special relativity. If you speed is v and the speed of light is c then<br>Gamma factor = 1/sqrt(1-(v/c)^2)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It really depends on what you think is relevant .
For example if the purpose is to do research for people on Earth , you probably are interested ( at least in part ) in the time taken for the round trip , and how long people on Earth have to wait to see the benefits of their investment .
If you are looking at colonization then you are probably more interested in the amount of time as experienced by the people travelling on the ship .
In this case the difference between 99.9 \ % of the speed of light , and 99.99 \ % of the speed of light is significant.To make the example concrete , let us take your example of Alpha Centuri : Distance : ~ 4 light-years .
99.9 \ % of the speed of light : Time ( Earth observer ) : 4 years and 1.5 daysGamma factor * : 22.4Time ( Ship observer ) : 65 days 99.99 \ % of the speed of light : Time ( Earth observer ) : 4 years and part of a day.Gamma factor * : 70.7Time ( Ship observer ) : 20.5 days.So from the point of view of the * crew * the journey takes about a third the time , although from Earth you are correct in stating they are essentially the same .
* The gamma factor , or time dilation factor ( or length contraction factor ) , is given by special relativity .
If you speed is v and the speed of light is c thenGamma factor = 1/sqrt ( 1- ( v/c ) ^ 2 )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It really depends on what you think is relevant.
For example if the purpose is to do research for people on Earth, you probably are interested (at least in part) in the time taken for the round trip, and how long people on Earth have to wait to see the benefits of their investment.
If you are looking at colonization then you are probably more interested in the amount of time as experienced by the people travelling on the ship.
In this case the difference between 99.9\% of the speed of light, and 99.99\% of the speed of light is significant.To make the example concrete, let us take your example of Alpha Centuri:Distance: ~ 4 light-years.
99.9\% of the speed of light:Time (Earth observer): 4 years and 1.5 daysGamma factor*: 22.4Time (Ship observer): 65 days  99.99\% of the speed of light:Time (Earth observer): 4 years and part of a day.Gamma factor*: 70.7Time (Ship observer): 20.5 days.So from the point of view of the *crew* the journey takes about a third the time, although from Earth you are correct in stating they are essentially the same.
* The gamma factor, or time dilation factor (or length contraction factor), is given by special relativity.
If you speed is v and the speed of light is c thenGamma factor = 1/sqrt(1-(v/c)^2)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174840</id>
	<title>Thanks for pointing this out</title>
	<author>sean.peters</author>
	<datestamp>1265014980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The slashdot crowd has a tendency to ignore this, but to do a project like this, there has to be some kind of a payoff - and the payoff for an interstellar mission would be 1) uncertain at a best, and 2) wouldn't come for decades or more. The net present value, accordingly, is zero, and the amount of expenditure required would be huge. Therefore, it ain't happening.</p><p>You might make a case that one or more of the world's governments may want to do this for the sheer scientific knowledge to be gained, but still: 1) huge upfront payment, 2) data doesn't come back until we're all dead (I mean, all of us currently alive). It's a really hard sell to your taxpayers.</p><p>So the bottom line here is that interstellar travel is pretty much a non-starter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The slashdot crowd has a tendency to ignore this , but to do a project like this , there has to be some kind of a payoff - and the payoff for an interstellar mission would be 1 ) uncertain at a best , and 2 ) would n't come for decades or more .
The net present value , accordingly , is zero , and the amount of expenditure required would be huge .
Therefore , it ai n't happening.You might make a case that one or more of the world 's governments may want to do this for the sheer scientific knowledge to be gained , but still : 1 ) huge upfront payment , 2 ) data does n't come back until we 're all dead ( I mean , all of us currently alive ) .
It 's a really hard sell to your taxpayers.So the bottom line here is that interstellar travel is pretty much a non-starter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The slashdot crowd has a tendency to ignore this, but to do a project like this, there has to be some kind of a payoff - and the payoff for an interstellar mission would be 1) uncertain at a best, and 2) wouldn't come for decades or more.
The net present value, accordingly, is zero, and the amount of expenditure required would be huge.
Therefore, it ain't happening.You might make a case that one or more of the world's governments may want to do this for the sheer scientific knowledge to be gained, but still: 1) huge upfront payment, 2) data doesn't come back until we're all dead (I mean, all of us currently alive).
It's a really hard sell to your taxpayers.So the bottom line here is that interstellar travel is pretty much a non-starter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172940</id>
	<title>scientology ftw</title>
	<author>archangel9</author>
	<datestamp>1265051640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Didn't L. Ron Hubbard already work this out with the <a href="http://www.fictionwise.com/ebooks/b5953/Invaders-Plan-/L-Ron-Hubbard/?si=0" title="fictionwise.com" rel="nofollow">Will-Be Was Engines</a> [fictionwise.com] from Mission Earth?  Heller figured out a way to bleed off all the excess energy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't L. Ron Hubbard already work this out with the Will-Be Was Engines [ fictionwise.com ] from Mission Earth ?
Heller figured out a way to bleed off all the excess energy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't L. Ron Hubbard already work this out with the Will-Be Was Engines [fictionwise.com] from Mission Earth?
Heller figured out a way to bleed off all the excess energy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171654</id>
	<title>Motion is so over-rated.</title>
	<author>gestalt\_n\_pepper</author>
	<datestamp>1265047920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Entangle all the matter on the ship and move it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.000000009 nanometers. Repeat process really fast until you look like you're exceeding lightspeed and moving. In fact, you'll never be anything but stationary. You get around all those movement problems like those UFOs that seem to act like they have no inertia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Entangle all the matter on the ship and move it .000000009 nanometers .
Repeat process really fast until you look like you 're exceeding lightspeed and moving .
In fact , you 'll never be anything but stationary .
You get around all those movement problems like those UFOs that seem to act like they have no inertia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Entangle all the matter on the ship and move it .000000009 nanometers.
Repeat process really fast until you look like you're exceeding lightspeed and moving.
In fact, you'll never be anything but stationary.
You get around all those movement problems like those UFOs that seem to act like they have no inertia.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172626</id>
	<title>Worst analogy ever?</title>
	<author>noname444</author>
	<datestamp>1265050860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd like to think that most people, like me, have no idea what happens if you stand in front of the beam of the large hadron collider. It might be that nothing happens or you might be vaporized on the spot. From the context I'm guessing more of the latter than the sooner but it's still a crappy analogy. Stick to what people can relate to, like:</p><p>"It's like standing in front of a moving car" or "It's like standing in front of 56 libraries of congress".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd like to think that most people , like me , have no idea what happens if you stand in front of the beam of the large hadron collider .
It might be that nothing happens or you might be vaporized on the spot .
From the context I 'm guessing more of the latter than the sooner but it 's still a crappy analogy .
Stick to what people can relate to , like : " It 's like standing in front of a moving car " or " It 's like standing in front of 56 libraries of congress " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd like to think that most people, like me, have no idea what happens if you stand in front of the beam of the large hadron collider.
It might be that nothing happens or you might be vaporized on the spot.
From the context I'm guessing more of the latter than the sooner but it's still a crappy analogy.
Stick to what people can relate to, like:"It's like standing in front of a moving car" or "It's like standing in front of 56 libraries of congress".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172788</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>LWATCDR</author>
	<datestamp>1265051220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Oh &mdash; and the Fermi Paradox applies especially well. Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system, and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period."<br>Unless we are the first.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Oh    and the Fermi Paradox applies especially well .
Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system , and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period .
" Unless we are the first .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Oh — and the Fermi Paradox applies especially well.
Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system, and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period.
"Unless we are the first.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31190860</id>
	<title>Re:Perspective</title>
	<author>SalsaDoom</author>
	<datestamp>1266487140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, if its anything like dodging asteroids you just hit the turbo and move up and down. No problem, nothing to see here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , if its anything like dodging asteroids you just hit the turbo and move up and down .
No problem , nothing to see here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, if its anything like dodging asteroids you just hit the turbo and move up and down.
No problem, nothing to see here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171386</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265047140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Some of those authors have / had engineering and science degrees.  That is part of what made them good at their job.  Isaac Asimov and Arthur C. Clarke are classic examples.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some of those authors have / had engineering and science degrees .
That is part of what made them good at their job .
Isaac Asimov and Arthur C. Clarke are classic examples .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some of those authors have / had engineering and science degrees.
That is part of what made them good at their job.
Isaac Asimov and Arthur C. Clarke are classic examples.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171210</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>NicknamesAreStupid</author>
	<datestamp>1265046660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If this 'warp' were applied to one mass, hydrogen, then it should apply to anything in space -- nebulae, planets, suns, black holes.  Most science fiction doesn't go that far.  I suspect there are exceptions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If this 'warp ' were applied to one mass , hydrogen , then it should apply to anything in space -- nebulae , planets , suns , black holes .
Most science fiction does n't go that far .
I suspect there are exceptions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this 'warp' were applied to one mass, hydrogen, then it should apply to anything in space -- nebulae, planets, suns, black holes.
Most science fiction doesn't go that far.
I suspect there are exceptions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31199492</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>RivenAleem</author>
	<datestamp>1266596220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For relatively local trips,</p></div><p>I c what you did there</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For relatively local trips,I c what you did there</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For relatively local trips,I c what you did there
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171664</id>
	<title>Re:Scientist-Schmientist</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1265047980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Relatively would not give a coherent description of a space time where large amounts of matter moved faster than the speed of light.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Relatively would not give a coherent description of a space time where large amounts of matter moved faster than the speed of light .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Relatively would not give a coherent description of a space time where large amounts of matter moved faster than the speed of light.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178944</id>
	<title>Source of blackbody radiation?</title>
	<author>marqulo</author>
	<datestamp>1265033280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read (only in one place and cant find that now, so..)  that as an object's velocity increases it experiences blackbody radiation in the direction of travel and that the bb temperature of the radiation is related to the velocity. Is this true? And are these sorts of intersteller material particles the cause? What about moving photons through space, as an objects velocity increases it must smack into more of them per time too and with more momentum, no?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read ( only in one place and cant find that now , so.. ) that as an object 's velocity increases it experiences blackbody radiation in the direction of travel and that the bb temperature of the radiation is related to the velocity .
Is this true ?
And are these sorts of intersteller material particles the cause ?
What about moving photons through space , as an objects velocity increases it must smack into more of them per time too and with more momentum , no ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read (only in one place and cant find that now, so..)  that as an object's velocity increases it experiences blackbody radiation in the direction of travel and that the bb temperature of the radiation is related to the velocity.
Is this true?
And are these sorts of intersteller material particles the cause?
What about moving photons through space, as an objects velocity increases it must smack into more of them per time too and with more momentum, no?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171326</id>
	<title>Lightspeed is so 1960's.</title>
	<author>gimmebeer</author>
	<datestamp>1265047020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why don't we talk about big robots with lightbulbs for heads while we're at it?  Even at lightspeed, it would take us 100,000 years to reach the other side of just our OWN galaxy.  Sure, it seems infinitely fast, but it's really not going to get us anywhere all that interesting in a single lifetime.  What we NEED, is to clone Hawking's brain a few thousand times, hook them all up to a central logic unit, then set them to work on a real Warp Drive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do n't we talk about big robots with lightbulbs for heads while we 're at it ?
Even at lightspeed , it would take us 100,000 years to reach the other side of just our OWN galaxy .
Sure , it seems infinitely fast , but it 's really not going to get us anywhere all that interesting in a single lifetime .
What we NEED , is to clone Hawking 's brain a few thousand times , hook them all up to a central logic unit , then set them to work on a real Warp Drive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why don't we talk about big robots with lightbulbs for heads while we're at it?
Even at lightspeed, it would take us 100,000 years to reach the other side of just our OWN galaxy.
Sure, it seems infinitely fast, but it's really not going to get us anywhere all that interesting in a single lifetime.
What we NEED, is to clone Hawking's brain a few thousand times, hook them all up to a central logic unit, then set them to work on a real Warp Drive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176676</id>
	<title>Re:Physician, not physicist</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265021400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oblig Mitchell and Webb:</p><p>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THNPmhBl-8I</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oblig Mitchell and Webb : http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = THNPmhBl-8I</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oblig Mitchell and Webb:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THNPmhBl-8I</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172898</id>
	<title>Re:Economics</title>
	<author>Ihlosi</author>
	<datestamp>1265051520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Sending a Shuttle-sized craft to Alpha Centauri in a matter of years would require roughly the current total energy consumption of humanity.</i> <p>

Err<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I don't think that accelerating a shuttle-sized craft at 4 or 5g requires the current total energy consumption of humanity. Probably only a tiny, tiny fraction of it. The only problem is coming up with a propulsion method that can provide such acceleration for long periods of time, and a nuclear reactor (fission/fusion/antimatter) small enough to fit on the craft.</p><p>

<i>Only when our civilization advances to the point that we harness a significant portion of the Sun's total energy output </i> </p><p>

Screw the sun. Way too bulky and pretty much useless once you get past Neptune or so. It's a bit like flight - you want the concept (aerodynamic lift/nuclear fusion), but not the actual implementation (flapping wings/gravitational confinement), but something that you can actually build.</p><p>

<i>One can suggest "sleeper ships", but building mechanical devices that will survive thousands of years is as hard a problem as throwing them across light years of distance.</i> </p><p>

Thousands of years? Are you proposing that someone rows that thing to Alpha Centauri? Unless we can go at least 0.01c, we shouldn't be thinking about leaving our solar system just yet, and at 0.01c the trip is going to be much shorter than thousands of years. At 0.1c it should be around a hundred years.</p><p>

<i>The next thought is to provide power to the ship during the long journey, </i> </p><p>

Big honkin' reactor. You might even be able to pull it off with a fission reactor, but I'd wait until we have either figured out fusion or come to the conclusion that artificial fusion reactors aren't feasible (let's hope not).</p><p>

<i>and, if you can comfortably survive for millennia in interstellar space, why even bother with stars in the first place?</i> </p><p>

Well, a sleeper ship isn't exactly "surviving". That'd be like saying "ok, if you have an aircraft, why bother with the ground".</p><p>

<i>Oh -- and the Fermi Paradox applies especially well. Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system, and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period.</i> </p><p>

Well, if you change the variables a little, it could take longer. Maybe it's not possible to colonize the galaxy in the way suggested by that approximation, since the stars aren't distributed evenly?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sending a Shuttle-sized craft to Alpha Centauri in a matter of years would require roughly the current total energy consumption of humanity .
Err ... I do n't think that accelerating a shuttle-sized craft at 4 or 5g requires the current total energy consumption of humanity .
Probably only a tiny , tiny fraction of it .
The only problem is coming up with a propulsion method that can provide such acceleration for long periods of time , and a nuclear reactor ( fission/fusion/antimatter ) small enough to fit on the craft .
Only when our civilization advances to the point that we harness a significant portion of the Sun 's total energy output Screw the sun .
Way too bulky and pretty much useless once you get past Neptune or so .
It 's a bit like flight - you want the concept ( aerodynamic lift/nuclear fusion ) , but not the actual implementation ( flapping wings/gravitational confinement ) , but something that you can actually build .
One can suggest " sleeper ships " , but building mechanical devices that will survive thousands of years is as hard a problem as throwing them across light years of distance .
Thousands of years ?
Are you proposing that someone rows that thing to Alpha Centauri ?
Unless we can go at least 0.01c , we should n't be thinking about leaving our solar system just yet , and at 0.01c the trip is going to be much shorter than thousands of years .
At 0.1c it should be around a hundred years .
The next thought is to provide power to the ship during the long journey , Big honkin ' reactor .
You might even be able to pull it off with a fission reactor , but I 'd wait until we have either figured out fusion or come to the conclusion that artificial fusion reactors are n't feasible ( let 's hope not ) .
and , if you can comfortably survive for millennia in interstellar space , why even bother with stars in the first place ?
Well , a sleeper ship is n't exactly " surviving " .
That 'd be like saying " ok , if you have an aircraft , why bother with the ground " .
Oh -- and the Fermi Paradox applies especially well .
Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system , and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period .
Well , if you change the variables a little , it could take longer .
Maybe it 's not possible to colonize the galaxy in the way suggested by that approximation , since the stars are n't distributed evenly ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sending a Shuttle-sized craft to Alpha Centauri in a matter of years would require roughly the current total energy consumption of humanity.
Err ... I don't think that accelerating a shuttle-sized craft at 4 or 5g requires the current total energy consumption of humanity.
Probably only a tiny, tiny fraction of it.
The only problem is coming up with a propulsion method that can provide such acceleration for long periods of time, and a nuclear reactor (fission/fusion/antimatter) small enough to fit on the craft.
Only when our civilization advances to the point that we harness a significant portion of the Sun's total energy output  

Screw the sun.
Way too bulky and pretty much useless once you get past Neptune or so.
It's a bit like flight - you want the concept (aerodynamic lift/nuclear fusion), but not the actual implementation (flapping wings/gravitational confinement), but something that you can actually build.
One can suggest "sleeper ships", but building mechanical devices that will survive thousands of years is as hard a problem as throwing them across light years of distance.
Thousands of years?
Are you proposing that someone rows that thing to Alpha Centauri?
Unless we can go at least 0.01c, we shouldn't be thinking about leaving our solar system just yet, and at 0.01c the trip is going to be much shorter than thousands of years.
At 0.1c it should be around a hundred years.
The next thought is to provide power to the ship during the long journey,  

Big honkin' reactor.
You might even be able to pull it off with a fission reactor, but I'd wait until we have either figured out fusion or come to the conclusion that artificial fusion reactors aren't feasible (let's hope not).
and, if you can comfortably survive for millennia in interstellar space, why even bother with stars in the first place?
Well, a sleeper ship isn't exactly "surviving".
That'd be like saying "ok, if you have an aircraft, why bother with the ground".
Oh -- and the Fermi Paradox applies especially well.
Assume that it takes even ten thousand years to colonize a remote solar system, and the entire galaxy would have been overrun by now if a colonizing civilization had started in the terrestrial Jurassic period.
Well, if you change the variables a little, it could take longer.
Maybe it's not possible to colonize the galaxy in the way suggested by that approximation, since the stars aren't distributed evenly?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175784</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265018100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The guy is a prof in a Medical school. What does he know about physics!?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The guy is a prof in a Medical school .
What does he know about physics !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The guy is a prof in a Medical school.
What does he know about physics!
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171496</id>
	<title>I'm disapointed</title>
	<author>BESTouff</author>
	<datestamp>1265047440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We don't need 99.99999\% of the speed of light. We need FTL (Faster Than Light), for before 2012 please !</htmltext>
<tokenext>We do n't need 99.99999 \ % of the speed of light .
We need FTL ( Faster Than Light ) , for before 2012 please !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We don't need 99.99999\% of the speed of light.
We need FTL (Faster Than Light), for before 2012 please !</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265047260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let me recap for you (both of the below points taken from the links I provided...):
<br> <br>
1) Proposed by the physicist Miguel Alcubierre, popularised by Star-Trek.
<br> <br>
2) Proposed by the physicist Robert W Bussard (hence "Bussard Ramjet"), popularised by Larry Niven (the author), and even referred to by Carl Sagan on TV and in books...
<br> <br>
Various other authors have used the same ideas. Perhaps I ought to have mentioned that I'm a physicist too... And the gentle humour regarding tense was supposed to clue you in that I wasn't suggesting we had a practical solution just yet... I wish I'd spelt "two thoughts" correctly, though.
<br> <br>
Simon</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me recap for you ( both of the below points taken from the links I provided... ) : 1 ) Proposed by the physicist Miguel Alcubierre , popularised by Star-Trek .
2 ) Proposed by the physicist Robert W Bussard ( hence " Bussard Ramjet " ) , popularised by Larry Niven ( the author ) , and even referred to by Carl Sagan on TV and in books.. . Various other authors have used the same ideas .
Perhaps I ought to have mentioned that I 'm a physicist too... And the gentle humour regarding tense was supposed to clue you in that I was n't suggesting we had a practical solution just yet... I wish I 'd spelt " two thoughts " correctly , though .
Simon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let me recap for you (both of the below points taken from the links I provided...):
 
1) Proposed by the physicist Miguel Alcubierre, popularised by Star-Trek.
2) Proposed by the physicist Robert W Bussard (hence "Bussard Ramjet"), popularised by Larry Niven (the author), and even referred to by Carl Sagan on TV and in books...
 
Various other authors have used the same ideas.
Perhaps I ought to have mentioned that I'm a physicist too... And the gentle humour regarding tense was supposed to clue you in that I wasn't suggesting we had a practical solution just yet... I wish I'd spelt "two thoughts" correctly, though.
Simon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171002</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>captaindomon</author>
	<datestamp>1265046060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not to mention the Bussard Collectors.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to mention the Bussard Collectors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to mention the Bussard Collectors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171412</id>
	<title>Sounds like good news to me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265047200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the problems with traveling in interstellar space is that there's not a lot of reaction mass out there to propel you. But if the hydrogen is dense enough to cause drag, it's dense enough to use as fuel too. So this sounds like good news for interstellar travel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the problems with traveling in interstellar space is that there 's not a lot of reaction mass out there to propel you .
But if the hydrogen is dense enough to cause drag , it 's dense enough to use as fuel too .
So this sounds like good news for interstellar travel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the problems with traveling in interstellar space is that there's not a lot of reaction mass out there to propel you.
But if the hydrogen is dense enough to cause drag, it's dense enough to use as fuel too.
So this sounds like good news for interstellar travel.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171602</id>
	<title>Easily Solved</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265047800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With shield technology. Because any civilization capable of constructing ships capable of flying at close to the speed of light will likely have shields that will protect them from interstellar radiation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With shield technology .
Because any civilization capable of constructing ships capable of flying at close to the speed of light will likely have shields that will protect them from interstellar radiation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With shield technology.
Because any civilization capable of constructing ships capable of flying at close to the speed of light will likely have shields that will protect them from interstellar radiation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171698</id>
	<title>Yeah but...</title>
	<author>JoshuaZ</author>
	<datestamp>1265048040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So going 99.9999999\% of the speed of light is really bad. Yeah ok. But if you instead go around 90\% of the speed of light this won't be an issue. And for most purposes the difference between 90\% and 99 isn't that much. The only major issue is that it makes a generation ship design more reasonable since there's less time dilation. But there's no good reason to accelerate much over 90\% given the diminishing marginal returns.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So going 99.9999999 \ % of the speed of light is really bad .
Yeah ok. But if you instead go around 90 \ % of the speed of light this wo n't be an issue .
And for most purposes the difference between 90 \ % and 99 is n't that much .
The only major issue is that it makes a generation ship design more reasonable since there 's less time dilation .
But there 's no good reason to accelerate much over 90 \ % given the diminishing marginal returns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So going 99.9999999\% of the speed of light is really bad.
Yeah ok. But if you instead go around 90\% of the speed of light this won't be an issue.
And for most purposes the difference between 90\% and 99 isn't that much.
The only major issue is that it makes a generation ship design more reasonable since there's less time dilation.
But there's no good reason to accelerate much over 90\% given the diminishing marginal returns.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172498</id>
	<title>Hyperspace</title>
	<author>wikes82</author>
	<datestamp>1265050440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is impossible to reach speed of light, as it will required infinite amount of energy, we are looking in the wrong direction,
the solution for space travel is FTL drive capable of opening Hyperspace</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is impossible to reach speed of light , as it will required infinite amount of energy , we are looking in the wrong direction , the solution for space travel is FTL drive capable of opening Hyperspace</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is impossible to reach speed of light, as it will required infinite amount of energy, we are looking in the wrong direction,
the solution for space travel is FTL drive capable of opening Hyperspace</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175010</id>
	<title>How many angels...</title>
	<author>sean.peters</author>
	<datestamp>1265015580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... can dance on the head of a pin? Seriously, the difference between 99.9999\% and 10\% of c isn't that much either, practically speaking. We can't come close to attaining either one. I'll start worrying about these other issues when we develop some practical way to go this fast.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... can dance on the head of a pin ?
Seriously , the difference between 99.9999 \ % and 10 \ % of c is n't that much either , practically speaking .
We ca n't come close to attaining either one .
I 'll start worrying about these other issues when we develop some practical way to go this fast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... can dance on the head of a pin?
Seriously, the difference between 99.9999\% and 10\% of c isn't that much either, practically speaking.
We can't come close to attaining either one.
I'll start worrying about these other issues when we develop some practical way to go this fast.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171698</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175408</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>Zarf</author>
	<datestamp>1265016780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If airplane tickets worked like that I would spring for first class.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If airplane tickets worked like that I would spring for first class .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If airplane tickets worked like that I would spring for first class.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173174</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173648</id>
	<title>Re:What would happen?</title>
	<author>Zerth</author>
	<datestamp>1265054100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anatoli Bugorski</p><p>After sticking his head in the beam, he looked like <a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/\_6I27LgG9bck/Sdrdadqli5I/AAAAAAAAJjo/pxnxO2fnPZU/s400/Anatoli+Burgarski.jpg" title="blogspot.com">this</a> [blogspot.com]</p><p>It was almost painless.  It just killed every cell along the path, which wasn't too bad until the skin peeled off.  He's lived nearly 30 years, even finished his PhD, despite receiving enough radiation to kill a person if it were spread evenly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anatoli BugorskiAfter sticking his head in the beam , he looked like this [ blogspot.com ] It was almost painless .
It just killed every cell along the path , which was n't too bad until the skin peeled off .
He 's lived nearly 30 years , even finished his PhD , despite receiving enough radiation to kill a person if it were spread evenly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anatoli BugorskiAfter sticking his head in the beam, he looked like this [blogspot.com]It was almost painless.
It just killed every cell along the path, which wasn't too bad until the skin peeled off.
He's lived nearly 30 years, even finished his PhD, despite receiving enough radiation to kill a person if it were spread evenly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858</id>
	<title>Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>verbalcontract</author>
	<datestamp>1265045700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And I was just about to get into my 99.999998\% lightspeed spaceship.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And I was just about to get into my 99.999998 \ % lightspeed spaceship .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I was just about to get into my 99.999998\% lightspeed spaceship.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176350</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1265020080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Personal Pet Peeve:</p><p>Americans who butcher the queen's english and then cringe when they hear/see it spoken/written correctly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Personal Pet Peeve : Americans who butcher the queen 's english and then cringe when they hear/see it spoken/written correctly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personal Pet Peeve:Americans who butcher the queen's english and then cringe when they hear/see it spoken/written correctly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171612</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>ArcherB</author>
	<datestamp>1265047860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Seriously, any number of sci-fi authors have covered this problem in enormous detail over the last few decades</p> </div><p>I thought they changed their name to SyFi.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , any number of sci-fi authors have covered this problem in enormous detail over the last few decades I thought they changed their name to SyFi .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, any number of sci-fi authors have covered this problem in enormous detail over the last few decades I thought they changed their name to SyFi.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170924</id>
	<title>Considering the energy required. . .</title>
	<author>Salgak1</author>
	<datestamp>1265045880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>. .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.to GET to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.99999998 c, this is unlikely to be a concern.  And if you have the effectively-infinite energy to move a ship at this speed, providing sufficient shielding should be a trivial exercise in additional hand-wavium. . . .</htmltext>
<tokenext>.
. .to GET to .99999998 c , this is unlikely to be a concern .
And if you have the effectively-infinite energy to move a ship at this speed , providing sufficient shielding should be a trivial exercise in additional hand-wavium .
. .
.</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.
. .to GET to .99999998 c, this is unlikely to be a concern.
And if you have the effectively-infinite energy to move a ship at this speed, providing sufficient shielding should be a trivial exercise in additional hand-wavium.
. .
.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172654</id>
	<title>Re:Fuckin' Noobs</title>
	<author>TooMuchToDo</author>
	<datestamp>1265050920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nice. And so the interstellar ramjet is invented. Fame me! =)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice .
And so the interstellar ramjet is invented .
Fame me !
= )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice.
And so the interstellar ramjet is invented.
Fame me!
=)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170962</id>
	<title>easy solution</title>
	<author>nomadic</author>
	<datestamp>1265046000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>All you have to do is navigate around the hydrogen atoms.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All you have to do is navigate around the hydrogen atoms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All you have to do is navigate around the hydrogen atoms.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171036</id>
	<title>7 teraelectron volts?</title>
	<author>Vinegar Joe</author>
	<datestamp>1265046180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll bet that would sting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll bet that would sting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll bet that would sting.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171198</id>
	<title>incorrect</title>
	<author>Atreide</author>
	<datestamp>1265046660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AFAIK Luke, Han and friends did not collide with some giant Hydrogen ollider.<br>They just nearly collide with a giant artificial moon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AFAIK Luke , Han and friends did not collide with some giant Hydrogen ollider.They just nearly collide with a giant artificial moon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AFAIK Luke, Han and friends did not collide with some giant Hydrogen ollider.They just nearly collide with a giant artificial moon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172266</id>
	<title>Re:Do keep up, dear boy...</title>
	<author>MozeeToby</author>
	<datestamp>1265049720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is that more recent work has found that Bussard Ramjets are probably impossible.  No matter how you design the scoop you end up losing more energy dragging the atoms in than you can get out of fusing them.  That said, I don't see those kinds of energies being a problem.  A few yards of lead laced through with a coolant of some kind should do the trick if nothing else.  If you're building a near lightspeed intersetellar spaceship, I would think that radiation shielding and cooling would be relatively low on your list of problems, even if it is at LHC energy levels.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that more recent work has found that Bussard Ramjets are probably impossible .
No matter how you design the scoop you end up losing more energy dragging the atoms in than you can get out of fusing them .
That said , I do n't see those kinds of energies being a problem .
A few yards of lead laced through with a coolant of some kind should do the trick if nothing else .
If you 're building a near lightspeed intersetellar spaceship , I would think that radiation shielding and cooling would be relatively low on your list of problems , even if it is at LHC energy levels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that more recent work has found that Bussard Ramjets are probably impossible.
No matter how you design the scoop you end up losing more energy dragging the atoms in than you can get out of fusing them.
That said, I don't see those kinds of energies being a problem.
A few yards of lead laced through with a coolant of some kind should do the trick if nothing else.
If you're building a near lightspeed intersetellar spaceship, I would think that radiation shielding and cooling would be relatively low on your list of problems, even if it is at LHC energy levels.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170986</id>
	<title>Exactly what I told the first 1.08 x 10^72</title>
	<author>BrentRJones</author>
	<datestamp>1265046000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Einsteins that I met on the way to this planet.</p><p>Wally Warp,<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; The guy who learned to JUMP to hyperspace and not accelerate into it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Einsteins that I met on the way to this planet.Wally Warp ,     The guy who learned to JUMP to hyperspace and not accelerate into it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Einsteins that I met on the way to this planet.Wally Warp,
    The guy who learned to JUMP to hyperspace and not accelerate into it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173092</id>
	<title>Re:Damn it, now they tell me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265052180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is this taking into account time dilation? 99.999998\% of the speed of light makes time run 5000 times slower. By comparison, 99.9\% of the speed of light is only 20 times slower.<br>Excluding the amount of time it would take to accelerate to such velocities, it could make the difference between a generation ship and a short trip.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this taking into account time dilation ?
99.999998 \ % of the speed of light makes time run 5000 times slower .
By comparison , 99.9 \ % of the speed of light is only 20 times slower.Excluding the amount of time it would take to accelerate to such velocities , it could make the difference between a generation ship and a short trip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this taking into account time dilation?
99.999998\% of the speed of light makes time run 5000 times slower.
By comparison, 99.9\% of the speed of light is only 20 times slower.Excluding the amount of time it would take to accelerate to such velocities, it could make the difference between a generation ship and a short trip.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173758
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_111</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31200122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171186
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31203290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31190860
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174758
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176520
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171942
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31193168
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_117</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_119</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_124</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172372
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_107</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_109</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_123</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172328
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171062
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_114</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31177274
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176944
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31180292
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171456
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31185144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171346
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_115</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173942
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_106</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_122</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_105</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172758
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31199492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_112</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31182402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31179652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171938
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175654
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31180696
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174434
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_104</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171698
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_118</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31180622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31180820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175274
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171226
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31179924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171664
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31177720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174036
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_116</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171328
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_121</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173394
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178978
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172266
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172728
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_108</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31180128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31181118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_113</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31183732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31182876
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_120</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_103</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31182436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172688
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176434
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_110</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172462
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176930
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172654
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178110
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176654
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_17_1526204_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171512
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171942
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178364
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172792
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172788
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31180292
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174758
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178978
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174680
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174290
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174840
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173758
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172340
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31182876
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172898
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175654
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31181118
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175010
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174742
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172036
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171290
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176434
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171186
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31179924
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31185144
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175274
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175784
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171292
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178110
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172332
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173164
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174916
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172654
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171938
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171002
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173560
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176930
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175330
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171794
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31179652
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175904
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172636
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176520
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31182436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31177720
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171326
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171528
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171492
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176690
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171228
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172224
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171722
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171406
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172462
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171038
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171618
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171328
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31180128
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171322
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172626
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174688
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170924
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171632
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173880
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173618
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173444
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176848
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171440
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31180820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174202
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176944
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176676
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171198
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171612
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171324
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171500
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31180696
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172668
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171226
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174400
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171128
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171386
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172758
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171426
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172728
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172054
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175970
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173942
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176350
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174210
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174036
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172372
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172328
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172266
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171062
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171654
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171102
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173050
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178732
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172358
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171170
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175012
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170866
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170872
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172364
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173778
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174434
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174176
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31177274
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173174
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175740
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31180622
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31203290
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31178106
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175408
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173578
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31200122
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173304
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173092
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173322
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173394
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31173398
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31193168
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31199492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31175640
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170844
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31182402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172688
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176654
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171924
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31176744
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31174074
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170928
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171664
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31183732
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171622
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_17_1526204.31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31170962
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31171370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31172532
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_17_1526204.31190860
</commentlist>
</conversation>
