Big Big Question

Imagine we had a machine that could convert matter into energy directly. However, with this machine the matter we use would completely disappear.

Is there some abundant resource that our planet could live without? Is there dangerous things we could put into this machine?

What would you put into it?

Even though we all know that the world is not going to end when CERN fires up the Large Hadron Collider on 9/10/08 at 700 GMT, what are your plans for your time between now and then? Is there anything you feel like you need to do before the world ends science begins?

(For the record, I read that they’ll just be accelerating some particles on 9/10- actual collisions will begin in the following weeks.)

OK, you’re a mad scientist…scorned by your peers, theories discredited, a disgrace to your field.

Time to take revenge! How do you destroy your enemies, threaten the world, and generally inflict terror in the masses?

Why is co2 always seen as a problem and not a useful resource? For instance large water tanks or reservoirs could be built inside or adjacent to power plants, pumped full of plant life (eg plankton)and exposed to sunlight. The co2 could then be pumped into the water and used to promote photosynthesis thus creating O2 and energy. Why is this not being considered as a possible solution to co2 emissions?

Would you go on a mission to mars? What about if it was a one-way mission? And you were by yourself?

Blatant Plagiarism: Gizmodo

Ok, so Ice Ages come along every so often. With global warming and are unstable environment we are sure to eventually trigger an ice age.

When this does happen, and assuming humans are still around. Will we be able to reverse such a huge global climate trend? If an ice age were to hit us right now, could we stop it? Is that even possible? Is anyone researching the answers to these types of questions right now, or do we have our heads in the sand?

ARPANET, the “1.0″ version of what we now comfortably call the Internet, has a history going back forty-some years and roots in a defense initiative to create a durable communications network — one that could withstand damage and still function.  History lesson adjourned.  Now:

At which point — at what practical limits of direct and indirect disruption — would the modern Internet fail?  And what levels of failure are we talking about?

Is the Arpanet initiative’s goal of a flexible network even relevant with the rise of ubiquitous public and private networking?