JohnRgt

New land speed record attempt coming

19 posts in this topic

Isn't it wonderful to see the thought and intelligence that is required to go fast. They should rub this in the face of those yahoo hoons who rip up pavement without any concept of applied intelligence. If you want to achieve, you can't be a nihilist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you explain something to me. Of what practical use is a -road vehicle- that can go 1000 mph. ? It could not be used on our highway system. It could not be used to transport freight or large numbers of people (as a truck or bus can). And we already have engines that can drive a plane 3000 mph and rockets that can go over 25,000 mph. So what is the Big Deal, pray tell?

Besides, a vehicle that can go 1000 mph will create a sonic shockwave that will damage property along the road side. The only safe place for a vehicle like this is the Salt Flats.

ruveyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you explain something to me. Of what practical use is a -road vehicle- that can go 1000 mph. ?

To further destabilize the planet's climate would top my list, followed by the indulgence of our lowest instincts/drives and the denial of food and/or general aid to the starving. For the rest, well, reread "every word" Miss Rand ever wrote, immerse yourself in every lecture ever released by SR/ARB, and see if you can find the issues of The Objectivst you received when you had your subscription -- time you read them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To further destabilize the planet's climate would top my list, followed by the indulgence of our lowest instincts/drives and the denial of food and/or general aid to the starving. For the rest, well, reread "every word" Miss Rand ever wrote, immerse yourself in every lecture ever released by SR/ARB, and see if you can find the issues of The Objectivst you received when you had your subscription -- time you read them.

That is not practical. It is ideological. If you were born since 1968, I have read and understood every word published in -The Objectivist- before you were born. To understand is not necessarily to agree.

But back to the question, if you care to answer it. What is the practical use of a 1000 mph supersonic vehicle that runs on roads. Since most of our highways go through cities and suburbs, the damage to property along the roadside would be monumental. For that reason it would not be permitted. If you want a 1000 mph land based vehicle that could run through cities and towns it would have to be enclosed in a tunnel from which the air was evacuated. A 1000 mph train, for example, running through a tunnel with air in it would create shockwaves that would refelect from the tunnel walls and destroy the train. That is not practical.

Let me make this plain. I have no objections to someone building such a vehicle at their own expense and running it safely on the Salts Flats in Utah. It is like mountain climbing. One climbs tall mountains, not for a practical end, but because they are there and they are a challenge. Building a 1000 mph land vehicle is a high tech, high cost form of entertainment. I am all in favor of entertainment, as entertainment. It is something that one can do for one's own amusement with no harm to others. But it is not the Greatest Thing Ever.

ruveyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is not practical. It is ideological.

Why the dichotomy? If you understand what motivates a moral man to climb a challenging mountain, you should understand at least part of the motive behind this project.

If you were born since 1968, I have read and understood every word published in -The Objectivist- before you were born.

Then why the question? Surely you know the answer you would get and the argument behind it. Wouldn't it be far more "practical" to tackle the aspects of Objectivism you disagree with directly?

To understand is not necessarily to agree.

Sure. In fact, I'd say that this is the usual scenario; one understands the argument offered but disagrees with some part of it, rejecting the conclusion. Which aspects of Miss Rand's relevant POV(s) are you rejecting?

What is the practical use of a 1000 mph supersonic vehicle that runs on roads. Since most of our highways go through cities and suburbs, the damage to property along the roadside would be monumental.

Who said anything about running this thing on today's roads? And how is that the standard by which we decide if this goal is practical?

Building a 1000 mph land vehicle is a high tech, high cost form of entertainment.

It's many, many other, far more important things as well -- things that go to the core of Objectivism/life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have no objections to someone building such a vehicle [...] and running it safely on the Salts Flats in Utah.

From what I've read, the Flats can't accommodate this thing. They do have another location in mind, but they'll first have to build a road to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's many, many other, far more important things as well -- things that go to the core of Objectivism/life.

What new technology do you expect to emerge? We already have jet engines that will drive aircraft over mach 3. We have ceramic technology which permits very high temperature jet and rocket propulsion. We have carbon fiber and other light-weight structural material. For high speed rail, there is ongoing development of mag-lev propulsion, probably the Next Big Thing in railroads. So what will a 1000 mph car do for us? Better to find a fuel source that renders us independent of Middle East disruptions. Better to find a way to get 100 mpg at normal highway speeds.

Chuck Yeager broke the (so-called) Sound Barrier more than 61 years ago. He did it in the air where the sonic shockwave is relatively harmless. He showed that very fast aircraft can be controlled and be fit to fight our wars, which is the main benefit of high speed aircraft. Your 1000 mph mobile is unfit for our roads. If it is made where can it be driven? Do you think it can be made and sold at a profit? I don't see this fast-mobile as a solution to our clogged highways and mediocre fuel economy. So what good will come of it? Solid applications are more important than techno-heroics. I see this speedy mobile about as useful as a manned jet pack for flying over the English Channel which is to say, not very.

What does impractical and useless go to the core of?

ruveyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is the practical use of a 1000 mph supersonic vehicle that runs on roads.

What is the practical use of pushing human knowledge and achievement to -- and past -- current limits? Perhaps we won't know until we do it. Of what practical use is a newborn baby?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's many, many other, far more important things as well -- things that go to the core of Objectivism/life.

What new technology do you expect to emerge? We already have jet engines that will drive aircraft over mach 3. We have ceramic technology which permits very high temperature jet and rocket propulsion. We have carbon fiber and other light-weight structural material. For high speed rail, there is ongoing development of mag-lev propulsion, probably the Next Big Thing in railroads. So what will a 1000 mph car do for us? Better to find a fuel source that renders us independent of Middle East disruptions. Better to find a way to get 100 mpg at normal highway speeds.

Chuck Yeager broke the (so-called) Sound Barrier more than 61 years ago. He did it in the air where the sonic shockwave is relatively harmless. He showed that very fast aircraft can be controlled and be fit to fight our wars, which is the main benefit of high speed aircraft. Your 1000 mph mobile is unfit for our roads. If it is made where can it be driven? Do you think it can be made and sold at a profit? I don't see this fast-mobile as a solution to our clogged highways and mediocre fuel economy. So what good will come of it? Solid applications are more important than techno-heroics. I see this speedy mobile about as useful as a manned jet pack for flying over the English Channel which is to say, not very.

What does impractical and useless go to the core of?

ruveyn

You ask, "So what good will come of it?", then assume that no good (for someone? for anyone?) will come of it. One might ask, What good will come of your assumption?

Also, in paragraph one you state, "Better to find a fuel.." and "Better to find a way..." These phrases imply(in the context of "what will" this "car do for us")---you would spend your time, your energy, your life better by by serving the goals of others, of society. Such altruistic nonsense has no place on an Objectivist Forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What does impractical and useless go to the core of?

I just donated to the Bloodhound project. Boy, does the possibility of seeing this thing concretize so much positive feel both practical and useful! (They now accept PayPal, even though the PayPal logo isn't included in the listing of available payment methods. Just click on "Donate".)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unlike today, sailing circumnavigations ad ocean crossings were still considered a big deal in the 1980s. These adventures even sounded more dramatic back then because the average sailboat was far smaller than what's taken as standard these days.

I remember reading a journal excerpt written by someone that was about to solo from San Francisco to Hawaii in a small boat (probably in Cruising World, but it could've been in any "serious" sailing mag.) Writing about people's reactions to his goal, he wrote something like:

A lot of people have asked me why I'm doing it. I've concluded that the world divides itself into two distinct groups. Those who understand the answer to that question almost intuitively, and those who never will.

"Understand" is the wrong word but his point is clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
--------------

"Understand" is the wrong word but his point is clear.

He thought of a summer day when he was ten years old. That day, in a clearing of the woods, the one precious companion of his childhood told him what they would do when they grew up. The words were harsh and glowing, like the sunlight. He listened in admiration and in wonder. When he was asked what he would want to do, he answered at once, "Whatever is right," and added, "You ought to do something great … I mean, the two of us together."

"What?" she asked. He said, "I don't know. That's what we ought to find out. Not just what you said. Not just business and earning a living. Things like winning battles, or saving people out of fires, or climbing mountains."

"What for?" she asked. He said, "The minister said last Sunday that we must always reach for the best within us. What do you suppose is the best within us?"

"I don't know."

"We'll have to find out." She did not answer; she was looking away, up the railroad track.

-----------------------------

I said, "not business or earning a living" … but, Dagny, business and earning a living and that in man which makes it possible—that is the best within us, that was the thing to defend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of what practical use is a newborn baby?

Brilliant analogy! The point is that in pushing any limits... in discovering anything, there is potential practical value because all things in the universe are interrelated. Why do engineering schools hold competitions to see which team can make a boat of concrete or drop a ceramic from the highest height? It is to inspire ourselves and others by exercising our abilities as thinkers to reign in nature and show our mastery of its concepts! And every team that does it learns practical knowledge, besides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[...] But back to the question, if you care to answer it. What is the practical use of a 1000 mph supersonic vehicle that runs on roads. Since most of our highways go through cities and suburbs, the damage to property along the roadside would be monumental. [...]

ruveyn

A joyride through Tehran?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is the practical use of a 1000 mph supersonic vehicle that runs on roads.

What is the practical use of pushing human knowledge and achievement to -- and past -- current limits? Perhaps we won't know until we do it. Of what practical use is a newborn baby?

I quite agree and if I may give two concrete examples. I was watching Dawkins on Youtube and they were interviewing Alec Jeffreys. In 1984, this fellow was looking at some x-rays of a DNA experiment and the possibility of DNA fingerprinting struck him. It was wholly unplanned and unknown and not the point of the execise at all, but the spin-offs have been huge in terms of crime detection, paternity etc.

Or, from the same video, this chap in Cambridge was trying to work out why genetic abnormalities formed on the eyes of some fruit flies. He believes he has identified a gene response to a certain protein (the science slightly eluded me at this point) but the upshot is, they believe that if they can fully understand this, it maybe possible to "switch-off" the gene in humans that causes and allows the growth of cancer! Not there yet, but quite an amazing, unpredicted spin-off technology

So the quest for knowledge and understanding, good in itself, sometimes reveals quite amazing and unplanned for benefits for humanity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites