The space industry has been around for well over half a century now and is still in its infancy. Due in part to Government controls and the high costs associated with getting a payload off the ground. Space is still inaccessible to the public due to the high costs of getting there.

The U.S. Government finally opened the door to the private sector a few years back to get involved in space ventures. Thanks to NASA and government funds to help build a new industry.

During the past 10 to 15 years the Space Industry has been slow to advance. Why?

The answer to that question lies in one word, “Profits”. Most companies do not venture into an area that they don’t see high profits in short periods of time. The same is true with Angel Investors, Venture Capitalists and so on.

The underlying problem always comes back to “Money”. To finance this industry requires deep pockets such as the recent influx of Billionaires or Governments. Huge corporations are reluctant to get involved because of the amount of time it will take to recoup the initial investment.

That is where 1st Space Bank and 1st Space Financial Institution come into the picture. Soon it will be the place for Entrepreneurs of all kinds to go to for financing their dreams and viable startups. They will come to us to get the initial funding to start their businesses without the fear of losing their ideas and companies to outsiders.

1st Space Bank and 1st Space Financial Institution will provide the funding and all of their banking needs. We will have a vested interest in their success and therefore will work with them all along the way. The current problem we see is the fact that to many people want quick profits and the ability to sell their investments at huge profits.

The Space Industry is the next generation in man’s evolvement. At the beginning of the 19th century it was called the Industrial Revolution today it will be called the “The Space Industrial Revolution”. Like J.P. Morgan did during that time we are doing for this time.

The solution to increasing the speed of development for the Space Industry is plain and simple making money more accessible to those that need it to build the future of mankind as a space faring race of beings.

The Space Industry is not a Billion dollar industry it is a Trillion dollar industry and as such needs that kind of financing available. This industry is so huge and the profit potential is so great we would be fools not to invest in it.

A recent article by Jeff Foust at Space

A Decade into a New Spaceflight Era, a Mixture of Frustration and Optimism

“It really has been frustrating to be 10 years into commercial space, 10 years from the X Prize, and not see a proliferation of activity, of people flying regularly,” Brett Alexander, director of business development and strategy for Blue Origin, said. Credit: Photo by Heriberto Ibarra

LAS CRUCES, N.M. — Ten years after the completion of the Ansari X Prize appeared to open a new era of commercial human spaceflight, company executives and government officials at a commercial space conference expressed a mixture of optimism about the future of the industry and impatience at the perceived lack of progress over the last decade.

“I’m actually quite frustrated with the pace of commercial space,” said Brett Alexander, director of business development and strategy for Blue Origin, the privately funded spaceflight company led by founder Jeff Bezos.

“It really has been frustrating to be 10 years into commercial space, 10 years from the X Prize, and not see a proliferation of activity, of people flying regularly,” he said in a presentation at the International Symposium for Personal and Commercial Spaceflight (ISPCS) here Oct. 15. Read more of Jeff Foust’s Article at Space News….

Build the Starship Enterprise

How Much Would It Cost to Build the Starship Enterprise?

How Much Would It Cost to Build the Starship Enterprise?EXPAND

So you want to build the Enterprise. Don’t we all! Well good news: according to some quick, messy, napkin math, it’s possible. Kind of. The bad news? It’s going to be stupid expensive. But not unfathomably so! Start scrounging up your space-pennies.

One little constraint

Since we can’t predict the future, or even come close to gauging the cost of development for revolutionary new inventions or substances like warp and impulse drives, shields, and teleporters, we’re going to stick to what we know. It might not make us a real Enterprise, but it’s about as close as you’re going to get.

So where do we start?

First we have to pick our Enterprise. Obviously, with Star Trek: Into Darkness coming out, we’re going to go with the one from that universe, from a size perspective anyway. According tosome stats we got back when the original Star Trek reboot came out a few years ago, we know the new Enterprise—or as the Star Trek wiki calls it: USS Enterprise (Alternate Reality)—is 725.35 meters, 2379.76 feet, or roughly half a mile long. So, huge. And while the exact measurements vary, other sources give us a height of 625 feet, and a saucer diameter of 1,000 feet. She’s a big girl.

How Much Would It Cost to Build the Starship Enterprise?EXPAND

Photo: Paramount

Raw materials

The closest thing we have to compare this to in the real world is probably a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier. The new Gerald R. Ford-class suckers will be bigger and more expensive, but we haven’t finished one of those yet, so we’ll stick with a Nimitz-class, specifically the George H.W. Bush, the most recent—and last—of the Nimitz breed.

How Much Would It Cost to Build the Starship Enterprise?EXPAND

Photo by: Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Nicholas Hall/US Navy

At 1,092 feet long, the GHWB comes in at just under half the length of the Enterprise. And witha 252 foot wide flight deck, it’s a fair bit thinner. But there’s a lot of empty space in theEnterprise, whereas aircraft carriers are more like solid chunks. Getting really specific with a starship’s actual volume would involve some annoyingly real math and measurements we don’t have, but we can safely assume it would take about two GHWBs-worth of material to build a suitably sized, Enterprise-shaped brute when you stretch it all out. Make it air-tight and we’ll call it a spaceship.

Unlike the Nimitz-class cruisers before it, which cost about $4.5 billion, the GWHB cost more like $6.2 billion thanks to modern day perks, and we need two. And we’re just getting warmed up.

Running Total: $12,400,000,000

Some assembly required

How Much Would It Cost to Build the Starship Enterprise?EXPAND

Photo: Paramount

According to the first JJ Abrams Star Trek film, the specific Enterprise we’re talking about here was built in Iowa. We’ll assume it’s getting the ISS treatment: Build it on Earth as a series of trivially sized modules that get assembled in orbit.

This is where the real cost comes in. If we go by the numbers from SpaceX, the Falcon Heavycan transport stuff to space for the low, low price of about $1,000 per pound. A GHWB worth of stuff weighs about 114,000 short tons. So a pair of them are 228,000 short tons, or 456 million pounds. Multiply that by $1,000 dollars per pound and… Yeah. We’re talking $456 billion justto get this into orbit, or $468.4 billion for an Enterprise-shaped space station, total. And that’s not including labor.

That’s a lot of scary zeros, but really it’s not too too bad. This year, the United States defensetotal budget expenditure was $3.803 trillion. So it’s not like we don’t have the cash.

Construction cost (ex-labor): $456,000,000,000

Running Total: $468,400,000,000

Tea, Earl Grey, hot

Now that we’ve got our big, hulking shell assembled, it’s about time that we start filling it up with some awesome tech. One of the (many) iconic technologies in the Star Trek universe is the ubiquitous replicator, making pesky things like staying fed a piece of cake. Sometimes literally. We don’t have anything close to the kind of build-anything-from-anything replicators from the series, but we do have something called the Replicator. The Replicator 2, as a matter of fact. Even better.

How Much Would It Cost to Build the Starship Enterprise?EXPAND

While MakerBot’s Replicator 2 is stellar 3D-printing tech here on Earth, the thought of outfitting our enormous, enormously badass Enterprise with just one seems ludicrously cheap and lame. That being the case, let’s set it up with a suite of 50 and just pretend we’ve got five that are 10 times the size. One MakerBot Replicator 2 retails for a scant $2,200, so we’re talking an acquisition cost of (a still scant) $110,000. We need stuff to print with too, though. Let’s say 45 kilograms (100 pounds) of plastic, assorted colors. MakerBot plastic is $48 to the kilo, so that’s $112,160 in printers and ink.

The shipping weight of each Replicator 2 is 37 pounds, or 1850 pounds total, plus our 100 pounds of plastic which brings us to 1950 pounds. Launch that into space ($195,000) and now we’re talking.

We looked into estimating the cost of something like one of Organovo’s crazy Bio-Printers, but they couldn’t help us out with any kind of number regarding price or weight, so we had to leave it out.

Total Replicator Cost: $307,160

Running Total: $468,400,307,160

Hit the (Holo)deck

Microsoft has a promising little at-home holodeck on the way with its IllumiRoom tech, but while that’d be great in your living room, we can probably spring for something a little fancier on our Enterprise. How about the CAVE 2, complete with 320 degree, panoramic 3D LCD display?

How Much Would It Cost to Build the Starship Enterprise?

This isn’t exactly a retail product, so we’ll have to piece together the cost (and weight) in broad strokes. The awesome curved, 3D TV we saw at CES has recently been priced at around $14,000 and we’ll need 72 for a total of $1,008,000 in TVs. We also need 36 “high performance PCs,” that are maybe $3,000 a piece? And also a setup of 10 motion tracking cameras that we’ll just say costs about $10,000. We wind up at $1,126,000 for procurement.

After a little black magic involving shipping weights and wild estimation, we can guess that this rig weighs somewhere around 5,378 pounds. As for software development, well, you’re you’re going to have to program you own games. Sorry.

Holodeck cost: $6,504,000

Running Total: $468,406,811,160

Fire photon torpedoes!

But really that’s only half the battle. Or really it’s none of the battle; this thing can’t shoot yet. The GHWB already had some armaments that are theoretically on our Enterprise now, but they are pansy Earth-weapons. We need photon torpedos and phaser arrays.

When it comes to photon torpedos—well, we don’t have photon torpedos. But tactical nukes seem pretty close, preferably in missile form. The UGM-133 Trident II is a modern-day ballistic missile that can rock a nuclear warhead. And, it can be launched from a submarine which means it’s pretty much a torpedo, right? Kinda? Sorta? Regardless, it seems like it could be strapped to—and fired from—a spaceship just fine.

How Much Would It Cost to Build the Starship Enterprise?EXPAND

Photo: Department of Defense

It’s pretty unclear how many photon torpedoes the Enterprise—specifically the rebootEnterprise—has, but we know the USS Voyager was designed specifically for scientific missions and had 38, so that seems like a fair bare minimum. Each Trident II costs $30.9 million to make, and weighs 129,000 pounds. So that means the cost of buying one “photon torpedo” and getting it into space is $159,900,000. The whole kit of 38 will cost us $6,076,200,000.

Photon Torpedo Cost: $6,076,200,000

Running Total: $474,483,011,160

Don’t phase me, bro

And of course, what would any good Enterprise be without its phasers? The Enterprise is said to have six phaser banks and fortunately, the Navy has some lasers that would be a decent substitute.

The Navy’s LaWS system cost $40 million to develop and build, so we’ll peg the sticker price at maybe $15 million per unit, for a total cost of $90 million for all six. The Navy’s been tight-lipped about how much they weigh though, so we’ll have to pull something really iffy out of the air and say each is about as heavy as a radar-guided Phalanx machine-gun bank just because that looks kind of similar-ish. So that’s 13,600 pounds each, or 81,600 pounds of gear (total) to blast into space.

Phaser Bank Cost: $171,600,000

Running Total: $474,654,611,160

Man Up

And what good is any of this if the ship is a ghost town? While it’s technically not a cost of building the Enterprise per se, we’d be remiss if we didn’t at least briefly consider the cost of manning this beast. Who knows exactly how many people man the Enterprise, including all the (hundreds of?) low-level nobodies, so we’ll just set it up with a skeleton command crew.

How Much Would It Cost to Build the Starship Enterprise?EXPAND

Photo: Paramount

Going by a list of notable crew members, we can figure we need—at minimum—11 people on this thing. Luckily for us, a recent agreement between NASA and Russia pinpoints the cost of flight-training a ‘naut and shooting him/her into the great void at $70.7 million. So assuming our cadets already know how to do their jobs, and only need a little space-training, that gives us a transportation cost of $777,700,000

Of course, you also have to pay these guys and keep them alive. Recent estimates put the cost of keeping a soldier in Iraq for a year at between $850,000 and $1.4 million, so let’s go with the higher end of that spectrum since we’re talking exclusively about officiers and they are also going to space. That nets us a $15,400,000 additional personnel cost.

Lastly, they’ve got to be fed and watered and whatnot. In 2008, NASA awarded a roughly $3.5 billion dollar contract to SpaceX and Orbital Sciences Corp to perform that very same job of ferrying cargo, except to the ISS. That seems like a perfect estimate so let’s just steal that wholesale as our supply cost.

Personnel and supply cost: $4,293,100,000

Running Total: $478,947,711,160

To boldly go…nowhere

Now that our Enterprise can defend itself, the only think left is to make it move. Unfortunately, that’s pretty impossible under even the vaguest realism constraint. Warp drives, while they arebeing researched, aren’t close to existing. And impulse drives—essentially fusion rockets—aren’t much closer; we almost had a fission rocket once, but it got mothballed.

More recently, there’s also been discussion of an impulse drive that could actually run on something stunningly like dilithium crystals: deuterium (a stable isotope of hydrogen) and Li6 (a stable isotope of lithium). This engine doesn’t exist yet though. And it’d likely require some very delicate orbital-construction that we can’t really hack yet.

That being said, we’re going to have to call it quits here, with our weaponized, Enterprise-shaped space-station, which is pretty damn cool in its own right.

Grand Total: $478,947,711,160

(Or: 12.59 percent of 2013 US Defense expenditure total budget)

What We Do and How Close are We

 What We Do


How close are we to convenient space travel?

What we do at The Center for Starship R & D is research the facts and theories to develop the first ever Starship class vehicle for human space exploration. We are taking Sci Fi to reality by looking at all the possible ways that will make this happen within the next 10, 25 or 50 years. 3D printers are the future of building almost everything and will be used to print the entire starship or at least as much as possible. We believe that using multiple printers the entire starship can be printed using components that are in powder form or reduced to a state that can be used and restructured at the molecular level. We were asked on Twitter today the following question from MacMedia @TheMacMediaShow How close are we to convenient space travel? A big Thank you to MacMedia. MacMedia @TheMacMediaShow

Astral Center for Starship R & D is dedicated to finding solutions for humanity traveling in space.


Theories, Thoughts and Mental Exercises

by Donald McElfresh

Theories of some of our greatest minds never had degrees yet we place an enormous amount of credence on obtaining degrees. A degree is only as good as the person who obtains it. Thinking outside the box sort of speaking is what made/makes the great scientists of the past, present and future. Sir Isaac Newton did not have a degree in physics but is attributed with being the father of physics.

I am an advocate of using one’s brain to question and wonder why things are the way they are and never accept what someone says is the only way it can be done. Imagine if Columbus would have accepted that the world was flat.

Here are some things to think about:

Why do we have negatives and positives in the universe? Everywhere I look I find examples of +/- negative or posative Electricity we always have +/-, men and women, deserts and jungles, hot and cold, you get the idea. Why don’t we have something in between +/- ?

What would be the sign or symbol of something that is neither + or -? Neutral is in between but what is it really?

In magnetics we have +/- or north and south. One attracts the other repels. Why? Do magnetic fields produce gravity? Or do they influence what and how we behave as humans? Can these magnetic fields be interrupted or changed? Do they provide or operate at certain frequencies?

If the Earth’s electromagnetic field protects us from the sun’s harmful rays and solar winds as well as cosmic radiation why can’t we duplicate that to protect our starship? A theory I am working on.

In computing we use 1’s and 0’s or pluses and minuses. Eventually we will figure out that everything in the universe can be duplicated or modeled by using 1’s and 0’s it is just a matter of time. Another point of interest to me is that we will soon figure out how to transfer our brains or backup our brains to computers that will allow us to live on in a virtual world or we might have it uploaded to robots or some other form. Speculation on my part but I imagine that during the 21st century we will have thousands of breakthroughs that will advance humanity further in 100 years than we have in 1,000 years.

A simple math problem about space travel:

If it took Voyager 1 thirty-five (35) years to reach the edge of our solar system how fast would you have to travel to get there and back in less than 7 months?

That is 125 AU or 11,625,000,000 miles traveling at about 37,500 mph. We need to figure out how to increase that speed.
To travel to the edge of our solar system and back in a decent amount of time will need speeds in excess of 250,000 mph. At this speed it will still take us 5.125 years one way or 10.25 years to make a round-trip. At a speed of 1 million mph it would still exceed a year long journey to get there and 2.6 years round trip.
I am estimating that at 5 million mph it will take 3.23 months to reach the edge and 6.46 months for the round trip.

Our current technology doesn’t give us any engine or mechanism that will propel us to 5 million mph. Even at half of that at 2.5 Million mph, we could do the slingshot method around Saturn and Jupiter to maybe increase our speed but may not be enough to reach our 5 million mph goal.

Voyager 1 & 2 Trajectories to the Outer Planets

Dark Matter, Dark Energy and The Aether (Ether)

In Einstein’s theories and it has been said that nothing can exceed the speed of light. The speed of light is the maximum speed in the universe.

Yes it is for the speed of light and all forms of energy that we know about. But suppose that dark energy or the Ether is traveling at speeds that exceed ‘c’. Or to put it another way suppose there is something that we can not detect or have any current means to detect speeds or dimensions in excess of ‘c’. Our knowledge of the universe is still in its infancy and we are still discovering new things in quantum mechanics, quantum theory, etc. Why can’t we find the largest prime number? What is it? How far does it go? It appears to me to be an infinite number that is virtually impossible to discover.

The funny thing is; when we don’t know about something we give some funny name, like “The Ether”.

But what is it? It is the stuff that holds the universe together and in place and keeps everything relevant to its whole. It is the glue that bonds everything together.

Why is space black? Where does all the light go?

Here on Earth light is everywhere but in space it isn’t. Our atmosphere acts as a giant lens and refracts all the light that enters the Earths atmosphere.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

New Technologies

 New Technologies and Future Tech

As we discover new technologies we will post them here and give you links to where we found them.

Telecom Calling on New Technology

The telecommunications industry is identified as a major driver of global economic recovery. Unprecedented growth in high-speed mobile Internet traffic, chiefly for wireless data and video, has transformed the industry into the most evolving, inventive and keenly contested space. In addition, the emergence of wireless broadband technology has created several new service areas, which offer significant growth potential.

According to a report by Infonetics Research, telecom operators globally generated approximately $2 trillion in revenues in 2013. This is a slight improvement from $1.9 trillion revenues recorded in 2012. Notably, the report also stated that telecom carriers are increasingly spending on network upgrades with the latest technologies. In 2013, carriers’ expenditures rose 6% year over year and are expected to rise at a CAGR of 2% from 2013 to 2019, most likely to reach a significant $367 billion.

While the telecom growth momentum is expected to be maintained in the U.S. over the near term, the major impetus is likely to come from the emerging markets of China, India, Brazil and Russia. Carrier expenditures have increased in Japan and even major telecom operators in Western Europe, the most economically vulnerable region, have raised their budgets.

Major Attributes

Currently, the U.S. telecommunications Industry is evolving around 5 broad factors. These include wireless gradually becoming the future of the telecom industry and the consequent popularity of spectrum. High-speed fiber-based network is projected to expand more aggressively, especially for video/TV offerings.

In addition, consolidation within the industry will continue mainly due to shortage of airwaves and attainment of economies of scale. Innovative product launches are expected in areas of m-Commerce, virtualization and cloud-based technology, high-speed metro Ethernet, to name a few. Apart from these, there still remains ample scope for expansion in the U.S.  According to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), nearly a fifth of rural American households lack broadband access.

Wireless is Key

Despite the massive growth in fiber-to-the-home networks, we believe that wireless networks will boost growth in the telecom industry. The GSM Association’s research wing, GMSA Intelligence, recently revealed its estimation of more than 1 billion global LTE connections by 2017. Currently, approximately 274 LTE networks are commercially available in 101 countries. More than 350 LTE networks will be commercially functional by the end of 2014. By 2017, the number is likely to reach nearly 465 LTE networks across 128 countries. At present, there are approximately 200.1 million LTE subscribers globally.

GSMA Intelligence further reported that LTE users consume an average of 1.5GB data per month, twofold of what is consumed by non-LTE users. In the developing countries, LTE users can generate 20 times higher average revenue per user (ARPU) to carriers than non-LTE users, whereas in the developed countries, ARPU can be 10-40% higher for LTE users than non-LTE users. Apart from the terrestrial wireless network, the U.S. has an advanced satellite broadband network, mobile satellite radio systems and extensive WiFi networks.

Research firm ABI Research recently reported that a significant boost for LTE network is expected to come from the Asia-Pacific region. In 2014, the Asia-Pacific region is likely to excel all other regions in the world with respect to LTE base-stations installation. LTE base-stations, which are popularly known as radio access networks (RAN), are expected to grow eight fold in the region this year. Also, wireless operators are projected to spend around $35 billion for RAN in 2014, globally, with Asia-Pacific accounting for the major share.

read more……

Hi-tech goggles ‘detect cancer cells’

 April 2014 Last updated at 06:43 BST A US trial of hi-tech goggles could reduce the need for secondary operations for cancer patients. Surgeons are not always able to tell if they have removed all the cancerous tissues and many patients face a follow-up operation to remove more. The goggles create an augmented reality, showing cancerous cells as glowing. Bahman Kalbasi reports. Share this story About sharing Email Facebook Twitter Related Most watched Top stories Related video / audio No related video Most watched Top storiesWorld UK Business Politics Health Science &more »




Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Tachyons, Bradyons and is “c” really the universal speed limit?

Let me first begin by answering the latter part of the question. Is “c” really the universal speed limit? Yes it is as Albert Einstein proved. But, let me expound on that statement, it is the universal speed limit for the speed of light. It is not however the ultimate speed limit of the universe. As with everything in man’s history we believe things that others say are gospel and to be true until one day someone comes along and opens the doors for new ideas and new ways of approaching the unknown. During the days of Columbus the Earth was believed to be flat. If man was meant to fly God would have given us wings. Instead of giving us wings to fly he gave us the same ability he has, “to create”. We are an intelligent life form with a brain that is capable of thousands of calculations per second and the storage capacity of a supercomputer. Most of us only use 6 to 10% of its capabilities. We see anomalies in others and we give it names like Autism, Bipolar disorder, Alzheimer’s, Asperger syndrome, Down’s syndrome these are just a few of the disorders listed in Wikipedia’s list of mental disorders. We do not understand these disorders yet, but it is my belief that they are short circuits in the brain that allow or disallow certain functions and activities in specific areas to be enhanced or blocked. It is up to us in the scientific communities to let our imaginations run wild and explore these phenomena for a better understanding of how to increase our own capacities from that meager 6 to 10% to 100%.

Now back to the subject at hand. Because we can’t see where something ends or begins does not mean it does not exist. Our very existence depends a lot on our ability and imagination to explore the unknown. I am constantly reminded how small I am everytime I think about the size of the universe we can see. I think of myself like the smallest atomic structure that we have seen under a microscope and compare that to the universe. Imagine what an atom must feel like when it is compared to the vastness of the universe.

I am constantly reminded of humanities inability to think outside the visible universe that we live in. Our inability to get past thoughts of…. that is impossible…. to that is possible. The universe itself is giving us clues how to get off our planet and explore the universe that lies before us. We must open our eyes and our minds and look at what is available to us and in front of us. The Earth is not flat and man was meant to fly, “c” is not the ultimate speed limit of the universe… it is for light, but it is not for the things we have yet to discover. Why are we constantly limiting ourselves? Why do we say that our periodic table is all of the elements known to man. The elements known to man seems to say that there cannot be any other elements, but leaves the door open to, just in case. The current periodic table lists 118 elements, some of these are man made and some 92 are found naturally occurring in our surroundings. I believe that once we really begin exploring space we will find many new elements and things that we can not imagine might exist.  The universe that we live in is so huge and so grand that we can not and should not speculate that anything is ultimate or finite.

Columbus proved that the Earth was not flat, the Wright Brothers proved we could fly, Chuck Yeager officially broke the sound barrier on October 14, 1947, Yuri Gagarin became the first human in space on April 12, 1961, making a 108-minute orbital flight in his Vostok 1 spacecraft, one month later Mercury Astronaut Alan Shepard became the first American in space. My point is this… man is not limited by anything except his own mind. Here is an example: “My dad always told me I was a dummy and I believed him because he was an authority figure in my life. He never wanted me or anyone else to prove him wrong. It wasn’t until I got to middle school and math classes (Algebra, Geometry, and Pre-Calculus) that I realized I was not a dummy, I made straight “A’s”.” I sometimes think I suffer from A.D.D. Attention deficit disorder. What is that? In my mind it is simply that my brain is functioning faster than what you or anyone else can keep it occupied for I am constantly thinking about a million things at once or so it seems.. In other words stop boring me with trivial bullshit and get to the heart of the matter. The children and adults with A.D.D. are operating at such a fast paced mental momentum that it is hard to focus on any one subject for any length of time. Unless you can keep them occupied with something that forces them to focus they will always seem to lack an extensive attention span. Think of an Atomic Bomb explosion it goes in all directions at once, but if you contain it like in a rocket and its energy is forced through a nozzle it becomes a very fast and powerful rocket engine capable of high speeds in space.

The speed of light may very well be the speed limit for light but I do not see how it can be the ultimate speed limit. Tachyon’s are probably the fastest thing in the universe but are not the ultimate fastest thing. We do not know because we have not discovered a way to measure anything traveling faster than the speed of light. Until recently we thought that Higgs Boson particle was just theory and just this year we discovered that particles can travel faster than the speed of light. I am just speculating here but when two items collide at a given speed any item that is able to break free from either of the two should have a velocity equal to the velocity at impact squared. But in most cases the shard that is expelled will have a greater velocity than at impact due to the energy that is transferred from the two objects to the shard being expelled. The discovery that, when two particles collide at the speed of light a shard or particle could be expelled at speeds greater than the speed of light only reinforced my thoughts along those lines. It is my theory that we have yet to discover what exceeds the speed of light, but we will discover things that go faster than “c”.

I am in agreement with what has been theorized so far about tachyon’s and braydon’s. I have copied this article from my favorite encyclopedia Wikipedia.

Because we can’t see something doesn’t mean that it does not or can not exist.


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about hypothetical faster-than-light particles. For quantum fields with imaginary mass, see Tachyonic field. For other uses, see Tachyon (disambiguation).

Alt text

Because a tachyon would always move faster than light, we would not be able to see it approaching. After a tachyon has passed nearby, we would be able to see two images of it, appearing and departing in opposite directions. The black line is the shock wave of Cherenkov radiation, shown only in one moment of time. This double image effect is most prominent for an observer located directly in the path of a superluminal object (in this example a sphere, shown in grey). The right hand bluish shape is the image formed by the blue-doppler shifted light arriving at the observer—who is located at the apex of the black Cherenkov lines—from the sphere as it approaches. The left-hand reddish image is formed from red-shifted light that leaves the sphere after it passes the observer. Because the object arrives before the light, the observer sees nothing until the sphere starts to pass the observer, after which the image-as-seen-by-the-observer splits into two—one of the arriving sphere (to the right) and one of the departing sphere (to the left).

tachyon /ˈtæki.ɒn/ or tachyonic particle is a hypothetical particle that always moves faster than light. The word comes from the Greek:ταχύς or tachys, meaning “swift, quick, fast, rapid”, and was coined by Gerald Feinberg.[1] Most physicists think that faster-than-light particles cannot exist because they are not consistent with the known laws of physics.[2][3] If such particles did exist, they could be used to build a tachyonic antitelephone and send signals faster than light, which (according to special relativity) would lead to violations ofcausality.[3] Potentially consistent theories that allow faster-than-light particles include those that break Lorentz invariance, the symmetry underlying special relativity, so that the speed of light is not a barrier.

In the 1967 paper that coined the term,[1] Feinberg proposed that tachyonic particles could be quanta of a quantum field with negative squared mass. However, it was soon realized that excitations of such imaginary mass fields do not in fact propagate faster than light,[4] and instead represent an instability known as tachyon condensation.[2] Nevertheless, negative squared mass fields are commonly referred to as “tachyons”,[5] and in fact have come to play an important role in modern physics.

Despite theoretical arguments against the existence of faster-than-light particles, experiments have been conducted to search for them. No compelling evidence for their existence has been found.[6] I must add this 3 letter word YET!

The universe is not our Final Frontier it is actually the beginning of a New Frontier.

I am constantly observing how things work in our known universe and wondering how we might apply the same things to our existence in space and in space travel. We all know that the sun gives off enormous of energy, How do we duplicate and harness that energy? The Earth has a molten core so how so we duplicate that and create artificial gravity, artificial atmosphere, and oxygen? How do we duplicate the energy that the Earth produces to generate electricity? After all the Earth is one giant electric generating power plant. How do we duplicate and harness the power of lightning? Nikola Tesla already did that right?

The Earth is made up of a molten core that we assume is iron to produce a magnetic field. This magnetic field produces a small electric current yes or no?

I will leave you with that thought for today.





Difference Between Authorized Issued & Outstanding Shares

Authorized Shares

The number of shares a corporation has the authorization to issue appears in the company’s articles of incorporation, also known as a certificate of incorporation. Articles of incorporation must be filed with the secretary or department of state to begin the legal existence of a corporation. The articles contain basic information about a corporation such as the legal name and location of the business and the purpose for forming the company. A company cannot issue more shares than the company has the authorization to issue as indicated in the company’s articles of incorporation. Corporations are not required to issue all authorized shares, which allows the company to hold some shares until a later time when capital needs become more pressing.

Issued Shares

A corporation issues shares to investors to raise cash and acquire assets. Corporations issue shares by selling authorized shares to investors, as explained by the Accounting Coach website. This means a corporation can be authorized to issue 50,000 shares, but the company can choose to only issue 5,000 shares. On the other hand, a corporation authorized to issue 50,000 shares may issue all 50,000 shares. Even when a corporation issues all authorized shares, the number of issued shares can never exceed the number of shares the corporation has the authorization to issue.

Outstanding Shares

Outstanding shares indicate the number of shares held by shareholders. The number of outstanding shares can never exceed the number of issued shares or the number of authorized shares. For instance, a corporation that issues 20,000 shares has 20,000 shares outstanding. However, outstanding shares can be less than the number of issued or authorized shares. Let’s assume a company issues 1,000 shares, but buys back 200 shares. In this scenario, the company has 1,000 shares issued and 800 shares outstanding, since 200 shares have been retired or repurchased by the corporation.

Treasury Stock

Treasury stock is when a company repurchases its own shares from the company’s stockholders, as stated by the Cliffs Notes website. When a company purchases treasury stock, it does not exist as an asset to the company and treasury stock does not draw a dividend. A corporation can reissue treasury stock or terminate the existence of the treasury shares. Buying back shares may be beneficial for a corporation’s shareholders, since it decreases the number of outstanding shares. Decreasing the number of outstanding shares in this fashion increases a corporation’s earnings per share, according to the website.

See more at wiki 

%d bloggers like this: