https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1q7ZIp4poc
What causes this?

Retard here. Why does this sdhc I just formatted have data?

How likely is a moonbase within 10 years? What are the challenges aside from costs and political will? What will it let us do?

its ufo lol

You are alone, driving Daytona ring with a fast 4-speed stock car. You drive two laps. The first lap's average speed 60 mph. What needs to be the second lap's average speed so that your total average speed would be 120 mph?

Who was in the wrong here?

I'm looking for this one youtube lecture where the professor uses trees and crabgrass as an analogy to contrast two different neurological structures/patterns of thinking. Does anyone have a link?

Does anyone have any stories to tell/link about people who were terrible at math but it eventually clicked for them?

EXAMPLE CASE OF RING PLAUSIBILITY:

~ASSUMPTIONS:
https://space.nss.org/wp-content/uploads/Orbital-Rings.pdf
Module length: 100m
Module weight: 50 ton
No. of thrusters: 4
Ring height: 36,000 km
Therefore, orbital circumference: 2*pi*(6,371+36,000) =266,224 km

THRUSTER PERFORMANCE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_thruster
>Taking massive liberties on "technological development", they are already used for momentum-building propulsion in zero-g, keep in mind they are not designed for powerful thrust.
Power consumption: 100kW
Thrust: 20N

~CALCULATION:
Grav. force at given height:
https://opentextbc.ca/universityphysicsv1openstax/chapter/13-2-gravitation-near-earths-surface/#fs-id1168327935317
Using this derivation of g at height h, we have:
g = G(Me/r^2)
G = Cavendish gravitation constant = 6.67x10^-11 Nm^2/kg^2
Me = mass of earth = 5.96x10^24 kg
r = 6371+36000 = 42371 km = 42,371,000 m
Therefore,
g = 0.2214 m/s/s
>this is negligible until thrusters make module stationary, and thus not in freefall orbit

Force of the module's weight:
50 tonnes = 50,000 kg
At 36,000km, force = 50,000 * 0.2214 = 11,070 N

Equivalent amount of thrust from ion thrusters:
11,070 / 20 = 553.5 scale factor
Energy consumption and power will have to be amplified 553.5 times to match weight of each module.

Net energy consumed:
100kWh * 553.5 = 55,350 kW
or 55.35 megawatt

~FEASIBILITY:
No. of modules in a 266,224 km circ. orbit:
226,224 km = 226,224,000 m
226,224,000m / 100m (each module) = 22,622,400 modules total

Energy required for ALL modules:
22,622,400 * 55.35 MW = 12.52*10^11 MW

Real-world comparisons:
3GD energy output - 22,500 MW
>you would need *55.6 MILLION Three Gorges Dams* to power this ring instantaneously
>you would need to store this energy in the modules somehow

This calculation is only to power it statically - this doesn't take into consideration how much *time* it would take to assemble this ring.

The book:
The death of the dark energy idea
in light of ignored failures and inconvenient facts
The relationship between gravity and quantum mechanics.
Link to book:
www.thedeathofthedarkenergyidea.com
The dark energy idea is based on the observed redshift of the most distant galaxies
But ignoring the fact that the transverse wave model failed in some of its predictions
And ignoring the face that longitudinal waves accomplish the same thing and without failures
resulting in: the big bang is based on this redshift but the photon model/idea is wrong.
No dark energy implied by longitudinal wave model and No big bang.
Even more consequences shown in the book