 | | Re: Golden Ratio (was Over 70 LEGO products copied)
|
|
(...) For the record while I posted that text, I did not WRITE it. Bram trimmed off the cite I gave to the site I glommed the text from. I mean, really, does that prose read like something I'd have written? Sorry for any confusion (that Bram's (...) (21 years ago, 26-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Golden Ratio (was Over 70 LEGO products copied)
|
|
(...) Mathematics aside, it's been a long time since I read the 2001 series (2001, 2010, 2061, 3001), but I recall that in one of 'em, there's a statement with the idea that the monolith is based on squares starting at 1, and the thought went on to (...) (21 years ago, 26-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Proportions for a 2001 Monolith in LEGO?
|
|
(...) Wasn't the original monolith a pyramid in "The Sentinel of Eternity?" Did the short story specify its dimensions? Or was it a tetrahedron? I can't remember... Dave! (21 years ago, 26-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Golden Ratio (was Over 70 LEGO products copied)
|
|
(...) There isn't a link there, because the Golden Section isn't 2:3... The golden ratio is derive from a rectangle where if a square is cut from the rectangle, the remaining piece is another golden ratio rectangle. So, the sides of the original (...) (21 years ago, 26-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Proportions for a 2001 Monolith in LEGO?
|
|
(...) I meant to put the emphasis on just the word *size* there, to imply that. Ooops. :) (21 years ago, 26-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Proportions for a 2001 Monolith in LEGO?
|
|
(...) Indeed it does, but the proportions always remain the same. >> Mark (21 years ago, 26-Jan-04, to lugnet.build, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Proportions for a 2001 Monolith in LEGO?
|
|
(...) I actually don't know. Does it? I've never read the books (I found that quote while looking for any page that actually listed true dimensions), and I don't believe I ever watched 2001. I remember watching 2010 when I was still pretty (...) (21 years ago, 26-Jan-04, to lugnet.build, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Proportions for a 2001 Monolith in LEGO?
|
|
[adding .geek] (...) It's been a while since I read these books, but doesn't their physical *size change*? (21 years ago, 26-Jan-04, to lugnet.build, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: We're here to go
|
|
(...) The posts Larry is referring to were from much longer than 8 hours ago, though. (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: We're here to go
|
|
(...) I posted that response over 8 hours ago, when there were no second-tier responses, but I didn't get around to authorizing it until just a little while ago (compare the date-time stamps if you don't believe me, which you probably won't). I (...) (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: We're here to go
|
|
(...) Um, no, you wouldn't. Not necessarily, anyway. (...) Again, no, it wouldn't. Not necessarily, anyway. Read the rest of the thread before you start in on responding to the first post in it, that's often a good approach in my view. Especially (...) (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: We're here to go
|
|
(...) Dollar cost of the total amount of fuel aside, it is more efficient. When you launch a rocket into space, it has to carry itself, its payload, its crew, and its fuel. Making a rocket that can manage that from an Earth-based launch site would (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Over 70 LEGO products copied
|
|
(...) Well then, join the geek! (URL) I know, like the rest of us aren't) (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: We're here to go
|
|
(...) I'm not sure you need to develop a new launch vehicle per se, remember the assumption that the person heading this had just won the X prize.... but certainly some of the 12B cost figure is for launching things... Now the X prize vehicle (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We're here to go
|
|
(...) I don't have any problem with pursuing that end of the discussion, but I wasn't trying to kick of a debate with my original question. If it winds up there, though, I say groovy! I enjoyed that previous debate re: cost-value of space (...) (21 years ago, 20-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We're here to go
|
|
(...) I'm a big fan of space exploration. I'm an even bigger fan of universal state funded healthcare & education. Who in society will benifit most from a manned trip to Mars? Who in society benifits most from a lack of universal state funded (...) (21 years ago, 20-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We're here to go
|
|
(...) Well, there's expensive and there's *VERY expensive*, in terms of dollars per unit of work on task. Asserting that NASA falls into the latter camp (as I do) is debate fodder, so if you want to stay out of .debate, as you seem to, we won't get (...) (21 years ago, 20-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We're here to go
|
|
(...) If I read the original post correctly, the question was of fuel efficiency and the physical implications of a Moon-based versus an Earth-based launch toward Mars and beyond. Naturally this entails the cost of development, because fuel costs (...) (21 years ago, 20-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: VIRUS Sent to LEGO-fans!
|
|
(...) Thank you, Mark, for the info. Even with a minimum of knowledge of file extension, anyone can figure out that it wasn't any ordinary text file attached. So I sent it to Notepad and thus my system was never infected. But I'd like to warn other (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jan-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Spam/ Most Likely Virus Sent to LEGO-fans
|
|
The virus you describe is known to antivirus software and tools as w32.sober.c. See (URL) for information and instructions on how to remove it. >> Mark (21 years ago, 17-Jan-04, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
