From: John Clark (jonkc@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Thu Sep 21 2000 - 22:27:59 MDT
Michael S. Lorrey <retroman@turbont.net> Wrote:
>>Me:
>>About one hydrogen atom per cubic yard.
>I'll bet that the above calculated number of atoms is sufficient
> to allow interference to occur to some degree.
Well of course it does, otherwise we would have no way of knowing there was
one hydrogen atom in a cubic yard of interstellar space.
>>Me:
>>our telescopes work over interstellar distances
>Sure they work, but not perfectly.
Unlike neutrino detectors who's ease of use, economy, and perfect efficiency is well known.
>you seem to deny there could be any signal degradation, either due to
> natural or unnatural causes.
Only a moron would say there is no signal degradation at interstellar distances.
I am not a moron. Speaking of morons, it would be interesting if somebody could
come up with a more moronic way to communicate than neutrinos, well lets see,
gravity waves would be pretty stupid, but perhaps not quite stupid enough. Come on,
somebody out there must have a stupider idea.
John K Clark jonkc@att.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:31:07 MST