Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #70296 > unrolled thread
| Started by | jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-02-28 06:30 +1300 |
| Last post | 2015-03-05 14:50 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 141 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-02-28 06:30 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-02-27 17:58 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy awoolmeyer@gmail.com - 2015-03-04 08:53 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-04 09:59 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.com> - 2015-03-05 03:43 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-05 10:54 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.com> - 2015-03-06 02:02 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-05 18:06 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy awoolmeyer@gmail.com - 2015-03-05 11:00 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-05 11:17 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.org> - 2015-03-05 13:27 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy awoolmeyer@gmail.com - 2015-03-05 16:15 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.org> - 2015-03-05 19:21 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-02-27 13:24 -0500
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.org> - 2015-02-27 11:32 -0800
Re: ... Farewell Leonard Nimoy Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2015-02-27 20:14 -0800
Re: ... Farewell Leonard Nimoy Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2015-02-28 09:58 -0600
Re: ... Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-02-28 19:54 -0500
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-03-02 14:42 -0500
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-03 08:48 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-02 23:00 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-02 19:02 -0500
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-03 00:58 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-02 20:17 -0500
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-03 00:58 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-04 09:39 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-04 15:31 -0500
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-05 04:05 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.com> - 2015-03-05 03:45 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-04 21:02 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-05 18:57 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-05 18:41 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy android <here@there.was> - 2015-03-05 20:11 +0100
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-03 00:57 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-04 09:26 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-04 16:45 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy ErikRS <mac-dane@is.invalid> - 2015-03-05 01:27 +0100
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-05 02:27 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-05 16:32 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-04 20:55 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-05 18:58 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-05 09:50 -0500
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-05 14:54 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-05 08:02 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-06 09:53 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-05 17:23 -0500
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-06 16:17 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-05 21:38 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-06 08:51 -0500
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-06 10:49 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-06 23:02 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-03-06 16:10 -0500
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.org> - 2015-03-06 13:55 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-06 23:01 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.com> - 2015-03-07 02:45 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-07 07:08 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-03-07 12:20 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-07 15:21 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-06 18:34 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-07 20:34 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-07 09:01 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-07 11:37 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-08 13:31 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-03-08 14:51 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-08 15:23 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-07 20:53 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-07 11:36 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-08 13:31 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-07 20:53 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-03-08 10:49 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-03-09 09:08 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-03-09 14:44 -0400
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-10 08:52 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-09 13:47 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-10 13:23 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-03-10 00:38 -0400
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2015-03-15 16:03 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-10 00:17 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-10 23:29 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-10 11:37 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-03-10 14:44 -0400
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-03-10 14:59 -0400
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2015-03-10 14:51 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-10 18:46 -0400
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-11 15:08 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-10 23:56 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-11 20:05 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-11 01:45 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-11 22:25 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-11 02:42 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-12 00:18 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-03-11 09:01 -0400
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-11 13:06 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-11 09:57 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-03-11 08:50 -0400
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy awoolmeyer@gmail.com - 2015-03-12 17:43 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-12 23:45 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-03-10 08:15 -0400
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2015-03-15 15:25 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-03-08 10:17 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-08 13:31 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-03-07 16:07 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-07 20:34 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-07 11:47 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-08 13:31 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-03-08 14:51 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-08 15:23 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-03-08 16:12 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-08 19:46 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-03-09 09:06 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-09 14:33 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-03-09 14:56 -0400
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-03-10 09:42 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-10 15:18 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2015-03-11 07:32 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2015-03-11 07:25 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-03-11 09:02 -0400
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2015-03-15 14:15 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2015-03-11 07:37 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2015-03-11 05:52 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-11 19:52 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-07 20:57 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-08 19:46 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-07 23:18 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-03-09 09:05 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-03-08 10:47 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-03-07 20:55 -0800
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-03-08 00:00 -0500
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-08 10:16 -0500
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-03-09 04:18 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-03-08 10:25 +1300
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2015-03-15 14:56 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy John <Man@the.keyboard> - 2015-03-18 01:37 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-05 14:50 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-05 09:07 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-03-05 12:01 -0500
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-05 18:45 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-05 18:43 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-05 21:35 -0700
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-06 09:30 +0000
Re: OT: Farewell Leonard Nimoy Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-05 14:50 +0000
Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-05 18:58 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <1m0trc6.1kbb6y36yk7u0N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> |
| In reply to | #70475 |
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > In article <1m0tkla.1bkpgij132p49gN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>, Jamie > Kahn Genet <jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> wrote: > > > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > > > > > On 2015-03-05, ErikRS <mac-dane@is.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > > Jolly Roger wrote: > > > >> On 2015-03-04, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > > > >>> Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote: > > > >>>> However, in my humble opinion, this is absolutely Nimoy's most > > > >>>> memorable > > > >>>> achievement: > > > >>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGF5ROpjRAU> > > > >>> > > > >>> Before clicking on the link, I knew that's what it would be. > > > >> > > > >> +1 > > > > > > > > Nope - +2.:-) > > > > > > : ) > > > > > > I wish I had had the chance to meet Leonard while he was still with > > > us... > > > > I always wanted to meet Scotty, but any would do :-) > > I never met any of them, but I did meet Asimov once, and David Weber as > well. Cool. What was Asimov like in person? Where did you meet him? -- If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-05 09:50 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <oc-dnTXPVZih8GXJnZ2dnUU7-TWdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #70489 |
In article <1m0trc6.1kbb6y36yk7u0N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> >
> > I never met any of them, but I did meet Asimov once, and David Weber as
> > well.
>
> Cool. What was Asimov like in person? Where did you meet him?
I met Asimov once, too. It was a doubleheader workshop with Douglas
Adams. Mr. Asimov was very nice, took his time answering our questions
and even asked many of us questions of his own about how we might handle
something in our work. He had some funny stories about how not to do
things.
Mr. Adams, was nice enough, but more aloof. He mainly lectured.
Liked both of them, but Mr. Asimov was more respected and well-loved
uncle whilst Mr. Adams was more of a lecturer.
--
³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.²
‹ Aaron Levenstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-05 14:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <clr90oF75tsU15@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #70514 |
On 2015-03-05, Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: > In article <1m0trc6.1kbb6y36yk7u0N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>, > jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote: > >> > >> > I never met any of them, but I did meet Asimov once, and David Weber as >> > well. >> >> Cool. What was Asimov like in person? Where did you meet him? > > I met Asimov once, too. It was a doubleheader workshop with Douglas > Adams. Dammit. You guys are lucky! -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-05 08:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <050320150802201841%michelle@michelle.org> |
| In reply to | #70489 |
In article <1m0trc6.1kbb6y36yk7u0N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>, Jamie Kahn Genet <jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> wrote: > > I never met any of them, but I did meet Asimov once, and David Weber as > > well. > > Cool. What was Asimov like in person? Where did you meet him? He was as one would expect. He was the keynote speaker at the New York Mensa Regional Gathering in May 1978, but attended the gathering for the entire day, so we got to speak and interact with him then. Interestingly, his speech, including his introductory anecdote, appeared, verbatim (or as close to that as I could remember) in his column in the Feb 1979 Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction. My takeaways from his speech are 1. There is undoubtedly intelligent life "out there". 2. We will never be visited by them, nor will we ever visit them, because of the lightspeed limitation. He did not believe that there will ever be FTL transportation, nor shortcuts through wormholes, etc.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-06 09:53 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <1m0uwkk.auf6x418i6j47N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> |
| In reply to | #70518 |
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > In article <1m0trc6.1kbb6y36yk7u0N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>, Jamie > Kahn Genet <jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> wrote: > > > > I never met any of them, but I did meet Asimov once, and David Weber as > > > well. > > > > Cool. What was Asimov like in person? Where did you meet him? > > He was as one would expect. He was the keynote speaker at the New York > Mensa Regional Gathering in May 1978, but attended the gathering for > the entire day, so we got to speak and interact with him then. > Interestingly, his speech, including his introductory anecdote, > appeared, verbatim (or as close to that as I could remember) in his > column in the Feb 1979 Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction. > > My takeaways from his speech are > 1. There is undoubtedly intelligent life "out there". > 2. We will never be visited by them, nor will we ever visit them, > because of the lightspeed limitation. He did not believe that there > will ever be FTL transportation, nor shortcuts through wormholes, etc. Yep, Star Trek style warp seems most unlikely, nowadays :-( -- If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-05 17:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <IpSdnV6oXbn_SmXJnZ2dnUU7-XWdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #70548 |
In article <1m0uwkk.auf6x418i6j47N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>,
jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
> >
> > My takeaways from his speech are
> > 1. There is undoubtedly intelligent life "out there".
> > 2. We will never be visited by them, nor will we ever visit them,
> > because of the lightspeed limitation. He did not believe that there
> > will ever be FTL transportation, nor shortcuts through wormholes, etc.
>
> Yep, Star Trek style warp seems most unlikely, nowadays :-(
Beware making fun of science fiction as "science fantasy."
Unless of course it contains time machines, FTL drives,
force-field "shields", antigravity, Wesley Crusher, or
workable libertarian utopias. Then it's okay to laugh all
you like.
--
³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.²
‹ Aaron Levenstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-06 16:17 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <1m0veef.kbq7qd1l4nphrN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> |
| In reply to | #70552 |
Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: > In article <1m0uwkk.auf6x418i6j47N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>, > jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote: > > > > > > > My takeaways from his speech are > > > 1. There is undoubtedly intelligent life "out there". > > > 2. We will never be visited by them, nor will we ever visit them, > > > because of the lightspeed limitation. He did not believe that there > > > will ever be FTL transportation, nor shortcuts through wormholes, etc. > > > > Yep, Star Trek style warp seems most unlikely, nowadays :-( > > Beware making fun of science fiction as "science fantasy." > Unless of course it contains time machines, FTL drives, > force-field "shields", antigravity, Wesley Crusher, or > workable libertarian utopias. Then it's okay to laugh all > you like. I'm still holding out hope for wormholes for FTL travel (but it's not looking promising. Well, not unless you count success as arriving on the other end as radiation). -- If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-05 21:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <050320152138310214%michelle@michelle.org> |
| In reply to | #70552 |
In article <IpSdnV6oXbn_SmXJnZ2dnUU7-XWdnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: > Beware making fun of science fiction as "science fantasy." > Unless of course it contains time machines, FTL drives, > force-field "shields", antigravity, Wesley Crusher, or > workable libertarian utopias. Then it's okay to laugh all > you like. You've read The Probability Broach?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-06 08:51 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <pLadnZmh36NuLWTJnZ2dnUU7-d2dnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #70565 |
In article <050320152138310214%michelle@michelle.org>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <IpSdnV6oXbn_SmXJnZ2dnUU7-XWdnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Kurt
> Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Beware making fun of science fiction as "science fantasy."
> > Unless of course it contains time machines, FTL drives,
> > force-field "shields", antigravity, Wesley Crusher, or
> > workable libertarian utopias. Then it's okay to laugh all
> > you like.
>
> You've read The Probability Broach?
Nope. I shall track it down
--
³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.²
‹ Aaron Levenstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-06 10:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <060320151049589559%michelle@michelle.org> |
| In reply to | #70568 |
In article <pLadnZmh36NuLWTJnZ2dnUU7-d2dnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: > In article <050320152138310214%michelle@michelle.org>, > Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > > > In article <IpSdnV6oXbn_SmXJnZ2dnUU7-XWdnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Kurt > > Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > Beware making fun of science fiction as "science fantasy." > > > Unless of course it contains time machines, FTL drives, > > > force-field "shields", antigravity, Wesley Crusher, or > > > workable libertarian utopias. Then it's okay to laugh all > > > you like. > > > > You've read The Probability Broach? > > Nope. I shall track it down It is a book about a workable libertarian utopia, written by L. Neil Smith.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-06 23:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnmfkchs.160n.g.kreme@kreme.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #70572 |
Okay, so one time? In band camp? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> was all, like: > In article <pLadnZmh36NuLWTJnZ2dnUU7-d2dnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Kurt > Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: >> In article <050320152138310214%michelle@michelle.org>, >> Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: >> >> > In article <IpSdnV6oXbn_SmXJnZ2dnUU7-XWdnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Kurt >> > Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > >> > > Beware making fun of science fiction as "science fantasy." >> > > Unless of course it contains time machines, FTL drives, >> > > force-field "shields", antigravity, Wesley Crusher, or >> > > workable libertarian utopias. Then it's okay to laugh all >> > > you like. >> > >> > You've read The Probability Broach? >> >> Nope. I shall track it down > It is a book about a workable libertarian utopia, written by L. Neil > Smith. I cold use another wold-o-magic fantasy yarn to read, maybe I'll check it out. -- http://2blog.kreme.com And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time, lost in space, and meaning
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-06 16:10 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mdd532$43j$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #70552 |
On 3/5/15 5:23 p, Kurt Ullman wrote: > In article <1m0uwkk.auf6x418i6j47N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>, > jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote: > >>> >>> My takeaways from his speech are >>> 1. There is undoubtedly intelligent life "out there". >>> 2. We will never be visited by them, nor will we ever visit them, >>> because of the lightspeed limitation. He did not believe that there >>> will ever be FTL transportation, nor shortcuts through wormholes, etc. >> >> Yep, Star Trek style warp seems most unlikely, nowadays :-( > > Beware making fun of science fiction as "science fantasy." > Unless of course it contains time machines, FTL drives, > force-field "shields", antigravity, Wesley Crusher, or > workable libertarian utopias. Then it's okay to laugh all > you like. This book is worth a read if you want to know just what's possible and what isn't based on today's knowledge: The Physics of Star Trek Paperback by Lawrence M. Krauss <http://www.amazon.com/Physics-Star-Trek-Lawrence-Krauss/dp/0465002048/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1425675923> 'What warps when you’re traveling at warp speed? What is the difference between a wormhole and a black hole? Are time loops really possible, and can I kill my grandmother before I am born? Anyone who has ever wondered “could this really happen?” will gain useful insights into the Star Trek universe (and, incidentally, the real world of physics) in this charming and accessible guide. Lawrence M. Krauss boldly goes where Star Trek has gone-and beyond. From Newton to Hawking, from Einstein to Feynman, from Kirk to Picard, Krauss leads readers on a voyage to the world of physics as we now know it and as it might one day be.' -- I certainly feel like the product of quantum fluctuations on many days of the week, don't you? --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-06 13:55 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <mdd7mm$ear$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #70577 |
On 3/6/15 1:10 PM, Fred Moore wrote: > > The Physics of Star Trek Paperback by Lawrence M. Krauss I've read that book.. On warp speed it basically says "highly improbable". Transporters.. same thing. -- "Anything's a dildo if you're brave enough". - Abraham Lincoln
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-06 23:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnmfkcgd.160n.g.kreme@kreme.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #70579 |
Okay, so one time? In band camp? tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.org> was all, like: > On 3/6/15 1:10 PM, Fred Moore wrote: >> >> The Physics of Star Trek Paperback by Lawrence M. Krauss > I've read that book.. On warp speed it basically says "highly > improbable". Transporters.. same thing. I'd say transporters are WAY more improbable than warp engines. -- http://2blog.kreme.com "He is simply a shiver looking for a spine to run up." - Paul Keating
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-07 02:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnmfkpk1.15qo.tmo1138@davidjr-macpro.local> |
| In reply to | #70585 |
On 2015-03-06, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > Okay, so one time? In band camp? tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.org> was all, like: >> On 3/6/15 1:10 PM, Fred Moore wrote: >>> >>> The Physics of Star Trek Paperback by Lawrence M. Krauss > >> I've read that book.. On warp speed it basically says "highly >> improbable". Transporters.. same thing. > > I'd say transporters are WAY more improbable than warp engines. > Basically that's what he said. He also said about warp engines that the key will be to be able to curve space around the ship.. not propel the ship via FTL means. -- Ever get the feeling that the world's on tape and one of the reels is missing? -- Rich Little
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-07 07:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnmfl90r.1aj7.g.kreme@kreme.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #70598 |
Okay, so one time? In band camp? tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.com> was all, like: > On 2015-03-06, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >> Okay, so one time? In band camp? tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.org> was all, like: >>> On 3/6/15 1:10 PM, Fred Moore wrote: >>>> >>>> The Physics of Star Trek Paperback by Lawrence M. Krauss >> >>> I've read that book.. On warp speed it basically says "highly >>> improbable". Transporters.. same thing. >> >> I'd say transporters are WAY more improbable than warp engines. >> > Basically that's what he said. He also said about warp engines that the key > will be to be able to curve space around the ship.. not propel the ship via FTL > means. There is nothing in physics that prevents travelling at FTL speeds, the only prohibition is that matter cannot travel *at* the speed of light. Faster or slower are just fine. There is the problem of instantaneous acceleration to FLT speeds without ever moving AT the speed of light, but there are possible scenarios that could allow that. Not likely ones, but possible. Wormholes are also a potential, if extremely unlikely, scenario. Warping space is, honestly, the most likely of a host of highly improbable possible solutions to moving between points in less time than it take light to move between them. But in all likelihood we are pretty much stuck with this Solar System. -- http://2blog.kreme.com You are responsible for your Rose
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-07 12:20 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <070320151220524537%YourName@YourISP.com> |
| In reply to | #70577 |
In article <mdd532$43j$1@dont-email.me>, Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> wrote: > On 3/5/15 5:23 p, Kurt Ullman wrote: > > In article <1m0uwkk.auf6x418i6j47N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>, > > jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote: > >>> > >>> My takeaways from his speech are > >>> 1. There is undoubtedly intelligent life "out there". > >>> 2. We will never be visited by them, nor will we ever visit them, > >>> because of the lightspeed limitation. He did not believe that there > >>> will ever be FTL transportation, nor shortcuts through wormholes, etc. > >> > >> Yep, Star Trek style warp seems most unlikely, nowadays :-( > > > > Beware making fun of science fiction as "science fantasy." > > Unless of course it contains time machines, FTL drives, > > force-field "shields", antigravity, Wesley Crusher, or > > workable libertarian utopias. Then it's okay to laugh all > > you like. > > This book is worth a read if you want to know just what's possible and > what isn't based on today's knowledge: > > The Physics of Star Trek Paperback by Lawrence M. Krauss > > <http://www.amazon.com/Physics-Star-Trek-Lawrence-Krauss/dp/0465002048/ref=sr_ > 1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1425675923> But by "today's knowledge" 1000 years ago, a computer was impossible, flying between countries in a couple of days was impossible, let alone flying to the Moon, etc. People alive today can't even start to understand what may or may not be possible in another 1000 years and more. :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-07 15:21 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <1m0x6g5.1fc98ooldw4haN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> |
| In reply to | #70591 |
Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote: > In article <mdd532$43j$1@dont-email.me>, Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> > wrote: > > On 3/5/15 5:23 p, Kurt Ullman wrote: > > > In article <1m0uwkk.auf6x418i6j47N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>, > > > jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote: > > >>> > > >>> My takeaways from his speech are > > >>> 1. There is undoubtedly intelligent life "out there". > > >>> 2. We will never be visited by them, nor will we ever visit them, > > >>> because of the lightspeed limitation. He did not believe that there > > >>> will ever be FTL transportation, nor shortcuts through wormholes, etc. > > >> > > >> Yep, Star Trek style warp seems most unlikely, nowadays :-( > > > > > > Beware making fun of science fiction as "science fantasy." > > > Unless of course it contains time machines, FTL drives, > > > force-field "shields", antigravity, Wesley Crusher, or > > > workable libertarian utopias. Then it's okay to laugh all > > > you like. > > > > This book is worth a read if you want to know just what's possible and > > what isn't based on today's knowledge: > > > > The Physics of Star Trek Paperback by Lawrence M. Krauss > > > > <http://www.amazon.com/Physics-Star-Trek-Lawrence-Krauss/dp/0465002048/r > > ef=sr_ 1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1425675923> > > But by "today's knowledge" 1000 years ago, a computer was impossible, > flying between countries in a couple of days was impossible, let alone > flying to the Moon, etc. People alive today can't even start to > understand what may or may not be possible in another 1000 years and > more. :-) That said, we can still safely say matter to energy to matter transporters are mere fantasy. Some things are just too scientifically improbable. 1000 (or even 100) years ago we didn't know enough to have enough of a clue about such things. Today we do. -- If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-06 18:34 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <mddo40$bk0$1@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #70596 |
On 2015-03-07 02:21:19 +0000, Jamie Kahn Genet said: > Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote: > >> In article <mdd532$43j$1@dont-email.me>, Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> >> wrote: >>> On 3/5/15 5:23 p, Kurt Ullman wrote: >>>> In article <1m0uwkk.auf6x418i6j47N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>, >>>> jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> My takeaways from his speech are >>>>>> 1. There is undoubtedly intelligent life "out there". >>>>>> 2. We will never be visited by them, nor will we ever visit them, >>>>>> because of the lightspeed limitation. He did not believe that there >>>>>> will ever be FTL transportation, nor shortcuts through wormholes, etc. >>>>> >>>>> Yep, Star Trek style warp seems most unlikely, nowadays :-( >>>> >>>> Beware making fun of science fiction as "science fantasy." >>>> Unless of course it contains time machines, FTL drives, >>>> force-field "shields", antigravity, Wesley Crusher, or >>>> workable libertarian utopias. Then it's okay to laugh all >>>> you like. >>> >>> This book is worth a read if you want to know just what's possible and >>> what isn't based on today's knowledge: >>> >>> The Physics of Star Trek Paperback by Lawrence M. Krauss >>> >>> <http://www.amazon.com/Physics-Star-Trek-Lawrence-Krauss/dp/0465002048/r >>> ef=sr_ 1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1425675923> >> >> But by "today's knowledge" 1000 years ago, a computer was impossible, >> flying between countries in a couple of days was impossible, let alone >> flying to the Moon, etc. People alive today can't even start to >> understand what may or may not be possible in another 1000 years and >> more. :-) > > That said, we can still safely say matter to energy to matter > transporters are mere fantasy. Some things are just too scientifically > improbable. 1000 (or even 100) years ago we didn't know enough to have > enough of a clue about such things. Today we do. Ummmm.... ...no. We THINK we know enough to have a clue about such things; just as a thousand years ago, THEY thought they knew enough. That's the point.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-07 20:34 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <1m0xjfu.6t69zy56sy6aN%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz> |
| In reply to | #70597 |
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: > On 2015-03-07 02:21:19 +0000, Jamie Kahn Genet said: > > > Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote: > > > >> In article <mdd532$43j$1@dont-email.me>, Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> > >> wrote: > >>> On 3/5/15 5:23 p, Kurt Ullman wrote: > >>>> In article <1m0uwkk.auf6x418i6j47N%jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>, > >>>> jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> My takeaways from his speech are > >>>>>> 1. There is undoubtedly intelligent life "out there". > >>>>>> 2. We will never be visited by them, nor will we ever visit them, > >>>>>> because of the lightspeed limitation. He did not believe that there > >>>>>> will ever be FTL transportation, nor shortcuts through wormholes, etc. > >>>>> > >>>>> Yep, Star Trek style warp seems most unlikely, nowadays :-( > >>>> > >>>> Beware making fun of science fiction as "science fantasy." > >>>> Unless of course it contains time machines, FTL drives, > >>>> force-field "shields", antigravity, Wesley Crusher, or > >>>> workable libertarian utopias. Then it's okay to laugh all > >>>> you like. > >>> > >>> This book is worth a read if you want to know just what's possible and > >>> what isn't based on today's knowledge: > >>> > >>> The Physics of Star Trek Paperback by Lawrence M. Krauss > >>> > >>> <http://www.amazon.com/Physics-Star-Trek-Lawrence-Krauss/dp/0465002048/r > >>> ef=sr_ 1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1425675923> > >> > >> But by "today's knowledge" 1000 years ago, a computer was impossible, > >> flying between countries in a couple of days was impossible, let alone > >> flying to the Moon, etc. People alive today can't even start to > >> understand what may or may not be possible in another 1000 years and > >> more. :-) > > > > That said, we can still safely say matter to energy to matter > > transporters are mere fantasy. Some things are just too scientifically > > improbable. 1000 (or even 100) years ago we didn't know enough to have > > enough of a clue about such things. Today we do. > > Ummmm.... ...no. > > We THINK we know enough to have a clue about such things; just as a > thousand years ago, THEY thought they knew enough. > > That's the point. It's so _not_ the point I've started writing this three times, and rewritten, as I had to think how to explain something too obvious to have previously been put into words by myself. 1000 years ago we knew nothing of atomic structure, let alone quantum physics. Thus the people of that era had no way to know matter<->energy transmission that perfectly replicates the transmitted object down to the quantum state, is highly unlikely. So unlikely it is effectively fantasy. Today we do. We've gone from knowing virtually nothing, to knowing a lot. We may still have a long way to go, but we can make considerably better educated guesses on the basis of a lot of knowledge, vs none at all. -- If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web