(Part 2) Best aerospace engineering books according to redditors
We found 788 Reddit comments discussing the best aerospace engineering books. We ranked the 222 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the products ranked 21-40. You can also go back to the previous section.
Dr. Kaku,
Thanks so much for the AMA.I have a few questions, but I haven’t yet had a chance to read your new book, so I apologize if you’ve answered these explicitly already:EDIT: After reading the book (my first M. Kaku book), and observing how carefully all of the legitimate and rigorous questions are avoided in the AMA, I am astoundingly disappointed at the quality of the "science" Kaku conducts. Pseudo-science and drivel. I feel like my brain needs a shower.
Definitely. For further reading, I recommend Wiesel's Spaceflight Dynamics.
It is much easier for a satellite to maintain its orientation if it is spinning. Otherwise, it starts to drift and point in different directions. Satellites must then be designed to spin on one of the two stable axes, because if it ends up on the intermediate axis it will wobble (and you lose your TV, cell phone connection, etc.).
What this usually means is distributing the mass of the internal components a certain way, or even adding ballast weights to set the moments of inertia as desired.
A pack of playing cards may be a simple rectangular prism, but even a complicated object like a satellite exhibits the same dynamic properties... it's just a lot tougher to figure out what the axes are.
Beyond stabilizing satellites, any maneuvering in space needs to take these concepts into account. A maneuver on the intermediate axis will be unstable. Spacecraft need to either compensate, or perform maneuvers on stable axes as much as possible.
P.S. I think they have to be designed to spin on one axis actually, but I can't remember if it's the minor or major axis. As energy slowly decays, the spin will gradually transition to one of the axes... but college was a long time ago.
You're looking for Orbital Mechanics/Astrodynamics. MIT has an Open Courseware class on it. Looks like they use
this book
THE book is https://www.amazon.com/Engineering-Liquid-Propellant-Progress-Astronautics-Aeronautics/dp/1563470136
Could not have done it without that puppy!
Not directly related to SpaceX, but pretty exciting news, it could really open up the solar system (thus makes Mars colonization easier, so not totally unrelated to SpaceX ;-) ). This drive is similar in effect to EMDrive, but is much less controversial and has much better theoretical foundation, it's also less well-known. To see a layman's explanation of this drive, see: https://boingboing.net/2014/11/24/the-quest-for-a-reactionless-s.html, there's also a book: Making Starships and Stargates: The Science of Interstellar Transport and Absurdly Benign Wormholes
NIAC is NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts, it's a program to provide small amount of funding for TRL 1 breakthrough technologies, this is the best part of NASA IMHO, really what NASA should be doing.
If you're looking to get started, you should start with a good book like this one:
http://www.amazon.com/Computational-Fluid-Dynamics-John-Anderson/dp/0070016852
That book starts out with the basics of Fluid Dynamics equations and is really very good.
Turbulence theory and turbulence modeling is a pretty advanced topic. You will first have to learn about laminar boundary layers, boundary layer equations and then about transition to turbulence, turbulent boundary layers and turbulence modeling.
This is the best book I have read on Boundary Layer theory that covers both laminar and turbulent flow:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/3540662707/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1425473580&sr=8-1&keywords=schlicting+boundary+layer&pi=AC_SY200_QL40&dpPl=1&dpID=41ZQZkmQBNL&ref=plSrch
Turbulence modeling is something you can move on to after that. I recommend this book:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1928729088/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1425473660&sr=8-1&keywords=wilcox+turbulence+modeling
Wilcox goes into much detail about the nature of turbulence and the different methods that have been formulated to model this phenomenon.
Here is a book that talks about the basics of fluid dynamics that is pretty good too:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0123821002/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1425473759&sr=8-1&keywords=kundu+fluid+mechanics&pi=AC_SY200_QL40&dpPl=1&dpID=41h-Ynv4uGL&ref=plSrch
Another great resource is this set of fluid dynamics videos made a few decades ago. They are awesome and will give you a strong conceptual understanding:
http://web.mit.edu/hml/ncfmf.html
There you go. I'm sorry if I was unclear on anything. Let me know about it and I'll be glad to help you out more.
Now could you point me to some material about how you use hydrodynamics in your field? I love to learn about different fields! Thank you in advance!
/u/another_user_name posted this list a while back. Actual aerospace textbooks are towards the bottom but you'll need a working knowledge of the prereqs first.
Non-core/Pre-reqs:
Mathematics:
Calculus.
1-4) Calculus, Stewart -- This is a very common book and I felt it was ok, but there's mixed opinions about it. Try to get a cheap, used copy.
1-4) Calculus, A New Horizon, Anton -- This is highly valued by many people, but I haven't read it.
1-4) Essential Calculus With Applications, Silverman -- Dover book.
More discussion in this reddit thread.
Linear Algebra
3) Linear Algebra and Its Applications,Lay -- I had this one in school. I think it was decent.
3) Linear Algebra, Shilov -- Dover book.
Differential Equations
4) An Introduction to Ordinary Differential Equations, Coddington -- Dover book, highly reviewed on Amazon.
G) Partial Differential Equations, Evans
G) Partial Differential Equations For Scientists and Engineers, Farlow
More discussion here.
Numerical Analysis
5) Numerical Analysis, Burden and Faires
Chemistry:
Physics:
2-4) Physics, Cutnel -- This was highly recommended, but I've not read it.
Programming:
Introductory Programming
Programming is becoming unavoidable as an engineering skill. I think Python is a strong introductory language that's got a lot of uses in industry.
Core Curriculum:
Introduction:
Aerodynamics:
Thermodynamics, Heat transfer and Propulsion:
Flight Mechanics, Stability and Control
5+) Flight Stability and Automatic Control, Nelson
5+)[Performance, Stability, Dynamics, and Control of Airplanes, Second Edition](http://www.amazon.com/Performance-Stability-Dynamics-Airplanes-Education/dp/1563475839/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1315534435&sr=8-1, Pamadi) -- I gather this is better than Nelson
Engineering Mechanics and Structures:
3-4) Engineering Mechanics: Statics and Dynamics, Hibbeler
6-8) Analysis and Design of Flight Vehicle Structures, Bruhn -- A good reference, never really used it as a text.
G) Introduction to the Mechanics of a Continuous Medium, Malvern
G) Fracture Mechanics, Anderson
G) Mechanics of Composite Materials, Jones
Electrical Engineering
Design and Optimization
Space Systems
https://www.amazon.com/Theory-Wing-Sections-Aeronautical-Engineering/dp/0486605868/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=theory+of+wing+sections+abbott&qid=1572380480&sr=8-1
This book has an appendix with about 120 NACA airfoils with geometry and life/moment coefficients. Probably any other book would have them as well but that is one I have and its reasonable price.
AFOQT Study Guide 2017-2018: AFOQT Test Prep and Practice Test Questions for the Air Force Officer Qualifying Test https://www.amazon.com/dp/1635301041?ref=yo_pop_ma_swf
This is what was suggested to me
Jim Marrs goes into some pretty good detail surrounding some of these phenomena in his book Alien Agenda. Here is an excerpt from a portion of the book discussing the moon
Edit: The link I posted earlier was screwed up. You can also get the paperback super cheap on Amazon
I'd suggest getting Emily Lakdawalla's The Design and Engineering of Curiosity: How the Mars Rover Performs Its Job when it's out. She has been for many years my go to writer for space related news all over the world.
AFOQT Study Guide 2017-2018: AFOQT Test Prep and Practice Test Questions for the Air Force Officer Qualifying Test https://www.amazon.com/dp/1635301041/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_DcknDbKRXKD8J
And
AFOQT Study Guide 2018: Prep Book & Practice Test Questions for the Air Force Officer Qualifying Test https://www.amazon.com/dp/1628454776/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_HdknDbC62BJK1
Studied both of these and they both gave a pretty accurate representation of the actual test. Granted, there may be newer versions since I took the test early last year.
It depends on what you're interested in really. You can get the general explanation of Federal Reserve, Illuminati, 9/11, CIA, NSA, etc from just about any YouTube video. Some books that have recently opened my mind to other topics, however include:
The Source Field Investigations by David Wilcock - The best written and most well-sourced book I've read concerning alternative history, conspiracy theories, suppressed science, and a host of other topics. Main thesis being that consciousness is a nonlocal field.
Fingerprints of the Gods by Graham Hancock - Some of the best evidence out there for a lost civilization which fell out of power and memory sometime around the end of the ice age. A bit outdated, but a sequel is due this year.
Genesis Revisted by Zecharia Sitchin - Read this if you want to understand why some people think the Annunaki are a thing. Some interesting info, but I don't really buy into it that much.
Dark Mission by Richard Hoagland - Occult history of NASA, coverups of what was found on the Moon, Mars, and some suppressed science.
The Holographic Universe by Michael Talbot - Exactly what it sounds like
Rather than reading about the same theories in different words over and over, these books gave me perspective on possible reasons why TPTB do what they do. And an idea on what some deeper purpose for their intensive consumerism propaganda might be for, other than profit. Additionaly they exposed me to new/old ideas on what the universe fundamentally is and how it works, with some good science to back it up. Highly recommend all of these books.
The book you want to read is Huzel & Huang's Modern Engineering for Design of Liquid-Propellant Rocket Engines.
There's a PDF of the NASA SP that's it's based on available.
It will cover all the basics of turbine sizing and design. It has exercises you can work through as well. Be prepared for ugly English units.
Following what poster Vimana states, a few specific cases of alleged bases and alien artefacts on the dark side of the moon (or the moon in general) are recounted by Ingo Swann, a psychic who was involved in the early development of remote viewing and its protocols. He 'discovered' a base on the dark side of the moon in one of his remote viewing exercises, that he wrote about in the following,
Penetration: The Question of Extraterrestrial and Human Telepathy.
Another account, that takes in a wider context, not only artefacts on the moon, is the co-authoured book 'Dark Mission', by Richard C. Hoagland and Mike Bara:
About 'Dark Mission' - A summary of the book,
Dark Mission: The Secret History of Nasa, and on Vimeo, Dark Mission: The secret History of Nasa.
Based on the information in these peoples work, there has been a definite conspiracy to conceal said information from the general public, while exploiting it for unknown and/or nefarious purposes (military, intelligence, economic, political etc).
None of the authors and researchers mentioned above are necessarily accepted as credible, by any legitimated insitution or in the scientific community at least (see Hoaglands wikipedia entry in particular, Richard c. Hoagland), "Hoagland has been described by James Oberg of The Space Review and Dr. Phil Plait of Badastronomy.com as a conspiracy theorist and fringe pseudoscientist".
Research and verify for oneself I'd say,"the truth is out there"!
You should avoid choking the flow if possible. If you're stuck with a certain mass flow rate, try opening up the area to reduce the velocity (and thus Mach Number). The resulting shock formation will cause significant pressure loss. See the relations from NASA here: Normal Shock Relations. You'll find more detailed info here
For a slightly supersonic Mach number (M = 1.1) with flow terminating at a Normal Shock and assuming air under ideal conditions (gamma = 1.40), you can expect a total pressure loss across the shock of about 0.2% which is probably not a major problem. But this rises quickly for higher Mach Numbers. Check out this calculator if you want to try your own numbers.
For reference, you get a ~10% loss in total pressure at a Mach number of 1.58.
You should be able to assume isentropic flow everywhere but the shock (for which you can use shock relations to go from one isentropic region to the next). Pick up a copy of Anderson's Modern Compressible Flow if you want to learn more in depth.
I'd just like to point out that although the Bernoulli effect is secondary, it is in fact still very important. If thrust were the only force at play, then sailing faster than the wind would not be possible. Yet it theoretically is. Picture a properly tuned airfoil effectively tapping in to the internal energy of the fluid in which it moves. Moreover, the experienced sailor knows that optimal sail performance utilizes the residual air flow from the foresail to aid in inducing laminar flow around the main sail. That is why the physics is such that the mainsail is a more efficient sail per area, as the foresail aids in the lift of the mainsail by reducing turbulence. Sources: 1) A Manual of Sail Trim
and 2) Sail Power
These were the 3 I picked up.
This one seems to be the most popular, probably because of it's publication timeframe, 1971. Not too early, not too late.
This is an earlier textbook and is considered a classic at this point. Still useful.
While less popular (and more expensive), I found this one to be my favorite. Hard to say why, some combination of layout, examples, and teaching style. The fact that it was also published in my lifetime, unlike the other 2, might have something to do with it as well in terms of language, etc.
But take /u/The_Mother_of_Robots advice and don't do it. This is a
slippery slopethick atmosphere in a deep gravity well. There is no Lagrange point, just the abyss.Exactly. A handy-dandy book even exists for selecting such things!
https://www.amazon.com/Theory-Wing-Sections-Aeronautical-Engineering/dp/0486605868
Modern Engineering for Design of Liquid Propellant Rocket Engines. + 3.5 years of college education (Going into my last semester) + me being a dork looking at every SpaceX and rocket related resources I find.
Unfortunately orbital mechanics gets really complex really quickly. Some good textbooks on the maths of spaceflight are
Keep in mind that all of the above are textbooks at the advanced undergrad/first-year grad level.
I'm not aware of simpler books about spaceflight. It would be grand to have something akin to Anderson's Introduction to Flight for space; if anyone's aware of such a book, I would be more than glad myself to discover it!
You might find what you're looking for in Emily Lakdawalla's excellent book "The Design and Engineering of Curiosity: How the Mars Rover Performs Its Job".
Here's a good one: the "Starflight Handbook" is a good popularization of a lot of starflight-relevant physics.
Understanding Space: An Introduction To Astronautics is the book that I tend to see on most people's bookshelves when it comes to basic space concepts. I'm not sure it's at a high-school reading level, but it's pretty much the foundational book from what I've seen.
Isn't it guaranteed by Noether's theorem?
McCulloch's blog is entertaining, if you haven't seen it.
I also have Woodward's book but haven't read it yet.
I got my space-loving husband the book Packing for Mars a couple of years ago and he flipped for it. Several days of "Did you know...?!?"
This is a good read for you.
Nice info, but insufficient. Firstly, a debris shield ahead of your starship only shields against the additive energy of your velocity to the grains... helpful, but not comprehensive. So you still have to deal with grains coming at you from all angles at high speeds. Furthermore, if you're planning the flip your ship around to decellerate, your front shield is going to have to move around... and now deal with the fact your exhaust is hitting it from behind. Even if you carry a shield all around you and leave a small window for exahust, you still leave yourself vulnerable to that small window of entry.
Then you have to deal with the constant degradation of the shield. A few grams of TNT may not seem like much, but now imagine it going off every second of your multi-year journey and your shield ain't gonna last very long.
Finally, of course, you run the risk of larger grains (0.1 kg) which are much worse. And that's the issue... are you going to risk the trip to Alpha Centauri with a 10% chance you'll run into a larger grain and die?
If you want to educate yourself, please read up on the subject in The Starflight Handbook and stop downvoting me for giving you bad news.
I really like Sail Power by Wallace Ross. It will teach you almost everything that you can learn about sailing and sailboats while on dry land.
Emily Lakdawalla is publishing a comprehensive book on the details of the engineering of Curiosity. It looks like it's out in May. She's a planetary scientist who writes for the Planetary Society, and I can't recommend her stuff highly enough. If it's for an assignment, a month and a half might be too long to wait, of course.
He's known as GIThruster and Ron Stahl on NSF. Both banned. A Woodward crony. His MO is to plug pseudoscience books on Amazon.com. http://www.amazon.com/Making-Starships-Stargates-Interstellar-Transport/dp/1461456223
He completely blew up EmDrive thread 1.
> A good read, you should get it!
I wish I could find a copy for my dad since I know he would like it, but it seems really rare now. Over £400 for a used copy on amazon.
https://www.amazon.com/AFOQT-Study-Guide-2017-2018-Qualifying/dp/1635301041
Sure!
This first one is the one I like the best:
Fundamentals of Astrodynamics
Spaceflight Dynamics: Third Edition
Introduction to Space Dynamics
They're all heavy on equations and there's a lot of overlap among them. I found the first one, Fundamentals of Astrodynamics, to be the most approachable.
Pozar's text is the best resource IMHO.
Microwaves 101 is a nice website for RF concepts.
Here's a great text I learned a great deal from. It's an aerospace oriented resource focused on RADAR systems by George Stimpson.
And, I'm a fan of the Agilent Impedance handbook. I think its a nice treatment.
Try this: Introduction to Airborne Radar
Sorry, it's a bit over budget.
Spaceflight Dynamics by Wiesel has a section on optimal gravity turns if you're interested in the math. What it boils down to is you perform a very small angle turn as you leave the launchpad and then follow your prograde until you're in orbit. The math is in figuring out what that angle should be for your desired orbit. I read that book as a library loan, but I can look up my notes if you want more details.
Thanks !
Astroynamics - I really like Battin's introduction to astro ( amzn.to/2Iu6Jhz ), and based my series on the 2-body problem on chapter 3 in that book. It's a lot like a math textbook so BMW's Fundamentals of Astro ( amzn.to/2zJBWe3 ) would be a gentler, on both the wallet and mathematical rigor, text.
Numerical methods - I've learned numerical methods from a bunch of different places so I don't really have a go to textbook.
Note: Those are amazon affiliate links to the mentioned books. Affiliate links are the main way I support the site (pay for hosting costs)
A great relevant book from the guy narrating this:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Hunt-Zero-Point-Antigravity/dp/0767906284
There are several courses that ARO (usually) has, but ME exclusive program doesn't, such as Gas Dynamics, Low/High Speed Aerodynamics, Orbital Mechanics, Aircraft Stability, and Jet Propulsion. I based this statement from the school (CalPoly Pomona) that I went to. YMMV.
Book recommendations:
Aerospace is broad subject, you haven't specified whether you're interested in structures, aerodynamics, flight mechanics, or propulsion. I gave you a broad list of selection to reflect that, although I assume you are more inclined toward Astronautics (Space) part of Aerospace instead of Aeronautics (Air); hence you posted your question in /r/space.
Depending on the OP's starting math/engineering background, Understanding Space: An Introduction to Astronautics may be a better starting point.
https://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Space-Introduction-Astronautics-Technology/dp/0073407755
Last year (or the year before) I read the book Alien Agenda by Jim Marrs. He mentions these Pleiadians and the guy that communicates with them, Billy Meier. When I put that book down, I started googling Meier and read a ton of what he's written and what his "followers" have written. I haven't kept up with it for a while, but I found it all very interesting. Maybe you could check it out, speak their own language to them a bit? I'm going to get totally shit on here for knowing as much as I do about this.
This was one of my favorite classes and I thought it was a rather good book to learn from. That being said you can probably find it cheaper than this.
http://www.amazon.com/Orbital-Mechanics-Engineering-Students-Aerospace/dp/0123747783/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1395292188&sr=8-2&keywords=orbital+mechanics+for+engineering+students
You will NEED to have a good grasp on the laws of motion and math/calculus. Otherwise you will just not be able to do this stuff.
Ross, Sail Power
Marchaj, several books, and another
Introduction to Airborne Radar (Aerospace & Radar Systems) by George W. Stimson, here the second edition
Haha... That applet is fun to play with!
First off, spiraling in or shooting way off are no the only options. You can orbit at many speeds and altitudes. In a perfect world, orbits are either ellipses with an eccentricity between 0 and 1, a parabola with a perfect eccentricity of 1, or a hyperbola with an eccentricity greater than 1. Wiki conic sections if you need more information of those shapes.
The ellipse is the orbit, obviously, and the Earth is at one of the focii? An ellipse will keep its shape without spiraling in. It will only stop unless near the perigee the distance between the orbit and focus is smaller than the radius of the earth (collision).
A parabola is the perfect eccentricity where the satellite will not come back, and basically will eventually fly away and stop somewhere, while a hyperbola will have some escape velocity that it will keep flying at.
The only problem with perfect conic section orbits are perturbations. One is atmospheric drag. Even at LEO orbits, drag affects orbits. The ISS falls a few feet a day, and requires frequent changes to keep it at altitude. Higher Geo-synchronous orbits have very negligible drag, but its affected by Moon's gravity more, as the moon has its own gravitational pull.
Humans cannot simply launch a perfect rocket from earth and have it just "land" in the perfect orbit that it was intended for (like shooting a 3 pointer from miles away). Until a satellite is where it needs to be, it requires small changes in direction and speed, but these usually aren't very large and usually take place when you get closer to the destination.
There are books and books of orbital equations. I am in my 2nd of 4 graduate level orbital determination classes, but a good starting point would be the wiki page on the vis-viva equation. Following Wiki around can give you a better understanding than I can in a comment.
If you really are fascinated by this information, and are a self learner, I would definitely go check out Orbital Mechanics. I used this book in my class and it explains it well enough to learn it without an instructor..
These type of craft have been around for decades in the black world. It’s called electromagnetic-gravitics, or EMGs. Reducing the mass of a craft increases both its fuel efficiency and its speed, as force = mass x acceleration. Think of it as creating a bubble of your own local space-time. You create the bubble around your craft and then control the direction of that bubble and fly around like Glenda the good witch of the north in the wizard of oz. Or more accurately, as it was done in the ‘80’s movie, “Explorers”, staring Ethan Hawke, River Phoenix, and Jason Presson.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explorers_(film)
For more on this subject I suggest reading, “The Hunt for Zero Point”, by Nick Cook.
https://www.amazon.com/Hunt-Zero-Point-Classified-Antigravity/dp/0767906284
There have been other types of craft similar to this postulated.
Dr. Paul LaViolette has claimed for years that a different type of mass reduction technology was/is employed on the B2 bomber. One that uses plasma induction around the crafts body to reduce its air resistance.
This is probably the 2nd time I've seen Woodward mentioned on reddit. It's about time he's got some exposure. If there's any chance of a breakthrough propulsion scheme that actually works, then my money is on Woodward.
He also wrote a book recently, if anyone is interested in the details of his propulsion scheme: Making Starships and Stargates
See if you can track down a piece of a combat aircraft off eBay, and have it mounted. I'm in the middle of getting a air data probe mounted at the moment.
If that doesn't work, there are heaps of good books about combat aircraft. I'd recommend SR-71 Revealed, Sled Driver or Valkyrie
I love reading books and I think you would love to read this and this by Mary Roach.
Here is the desktop version of your link
That's not the right book, you want:
http://www.amazon.com/Sled-Driver-Flying-Fastest-Aeroplane/dp/1857800028/
or:
http://www.amazon.com/Sled-Driver-Flying-Worlds-Fastest/dp/0972268200/
or:
http://galleryonepublishing.com/BlackbirdStores/product_info.php?cPath=21&products_id=29
Is that Understanding Space? Excellent textbook.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0073407755/ref=tmm_hrd_used_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=used&sr=&qid=
I recently read a book, titled, The Hunt for Zero Point that discusses Die Glocke. I wrote a review of the book, where I state that Nick Cook seemed to be a bit too ready to accept the claims of researcher Igor Witkowski. While, I think that Witkowski's research is interesting and merits study by anyone interested in this subject. I only wish that he (Witkowski) would find a way to provide the world with copies of the documents that he claims to have read that led him to the conclusions that he makes about Die Glocke.
As has been pointed out already, there really is no evidence to prove that such a device even existed. But the rumors of it are indeed intriguing. Put quite simply, we need more tangible evidence.
So for Space colonization you really cannot go wrong with:
There are a lot of other books on colonising space, but these are the pair I have read and they are still entirely valid pieces of work (imo). An other you might want to check out is ['The Starflight Handbook' - By Eugene F. Mallove] (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Starflight-Handbook-Pioneers-Interstellar-Editions/dp/0471619124/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1465674138&sr=8-1&keywords=starflight+handbook) which covers the maths behind conceivable interstellar propulsion methods. All very cool stuff.
> taking the 2000 year figure, that's getting awfully close to the KJV (1611AD).
So taking "the 2000 year figure" to go from alleged composition to the first manuscript is comparable to the distance from the composition of the gospels to a popular English translation of a Latin translation of the original Greek how?
>You'll need a source for that, every contemporary historian agrees the earliest scroll dates to at least 30 years, and most claim it's more like 60.
Well I was thinking of 7Q5, which was in an area abandoned in 68 and dated by papyrologists to the first half of the first century, but it's a small fragment and not without controversy. There's a more recent (c. 2012) find that has been dated by one paleographer to the second half of the first century, but apparently hasn't been sufficiently examined by others... I've neither seen it discredited or publicized as confirmed.
Since those are both "iffy" sources, I don't mind sticking to 30 instead of 10-20 ... considering paper lasts several hundred years properly cared for, I don't think 30 years is long enough to require a whole lot of copying distance from the originals. I mean ... I have books on my shelf written on cheap wood pulp that are closer to a century than a half-century old (and that haven't been considered holy) and if I wanted to copy them I could; I'm not sure why it's expected that a copy 50-100 years from the originals would have had time to pick up a lot of errors... that doesn't make sense to me.
But why does it matter to you? If you are acknowledging that it's reasonable to care whether it's 10-20 vs. 30-60, then aren't you implicitly saying that it's not intellectually dishonest to consider provenance dates as a reason to believe one document over another?
>To pretend that 2000 years of closely preserved mnemonics will somehow specifically crumble Krishna's resurrection account is not only silly, but entirely unfounded.
If you want to disagree that oral tradition (even with "closely preserved mnemonics") is just as reliable as having a written copy of something and copying it letter for letter, then it's your prerogative to have that opinion... even if we think each other "silly" I don't think that leaves either of us in a position to accuse the other of intellectual dishonesty... just poor reasons for (honestly) believing or disbelieving things, right?
And I haven't seen a response to the idea that oral tradition shouldn't be considered as trustworthy as written copies, but regardless of that, in the 2500 years before the mnemonics began, from there to when the events supposedly happened, is also a big enough gap. Most info I've seen place him at around 3000 BC, if it took from then to 500 for the account of his life to be recorded, that's 2500 years of time for exaggeration to slip in... again, multiple orders of magnitude different from the gospel accounts.
>And again, this is just 1 of the 13 gods I've mentioned resurrecting themselves.
So are you saying that you recognize at least for this one that there are legitimate, non-intellectually-dishonest reasons to trust the New Testament over the Vedas, and you want to move on to the other 12 now? This is why from the get-go I was more interested in discussing the fact that different texts are different levels of trustworthiness for a number of different reasons. Could be the details, could be the provenance, could be the intended audience or the interest of those promoting it.
I can give you a dozen books about people going to the moon, from Jules Verne's 1865 From the Earth to the Moon to the fantastic North Korean story of Kim Jong Il's heroic conquest of the moon as told by the North Korean propaganda ministry, to the Bernstain Bears on the Moon, to Michael Chaikin's A Man on the Moon: Voyages of the Apollo Astronauts. Are Kim's and Chaikin's going to be equally credible because they both describe physical possibilities? Is Chaikin's story unbelievable just because Verne's, Kim's, and Bernstain's are incredible for various reasons? Should we discount Chaikin because of this book that says it was a hoax? Or should we believe it just because it's possible?
Edit: fixed a link
In viscous fluid mechanics, Schlichting's Boundary Layer Theory comes to mind.
That sounds great! Learning pro-e and model based definitions has been interesting. they don't teach either at our school, so it's been great getting paid to learn that and Gd&t for industry.
I'm on a mechanical design team for a liquid rocket engine. So far I've mainly been turning old drafted drawings into modern cad models with drawings that fit the company's current standards. Pretty surreal to see my name in the company title block.
I too bought this textbook on rocket engines which helps answer a lot of questions.
Human society developed from smelting iron to supercomputers in a few thousand years. Humans developed from domesticating animals to domesticating internet in a few ten thousand years. These were really fast developments. Now fast forward this just a little.
If we have a few thousand humans in space humans will, most pessimistic scenario, settle the moon and develop it for industry (and actually quite profitably so : http://www.scoop.it/t/space-versus-oil) in less than hundred years. Even using 1970s technology, and permutations of1970s technology we could have had a colony on the moon with millions of people living and working and consuming there in a few centuries. Mars would be next. In fact there's no reason humans would not be able to literally colonize and industrialize most of the solar system in just a thousand years. And it doesn't stop there. There are rocksolid arguments that creating habitable structures in space can turn asteroids and sunlight into millions of humans. Or billions of humans. In fact - there is easily enough minable raw material in the asteroid belt to turn in to thousands of earth's surface equivalent of rather plush, habitable colonial real estate. And that's just one solar system. This was described in great detail in these books
And mind you, this is with 1970s technology. We have better technology now in 2112 and we'll have even better technology in 2100. Or in the year 3000. (Provided we won't kill ourselves)..
There is no special technology needed to proceed to interstellar flight. We could do it today, if we had enough economic prowess. At turgid of 1% economic growth we easily have enough surplus economic power to conduct interstellar travel. Here's a book that describes a few dozen ways to do it.
It's an old book, a real classic, and while the technologies in the book are grotesque and brutal, they are old and tested. In some case 1950s technology.
The only conclusion is that human potential hasn't scratched the surface. There is a fair 50% that in a few thousand measly years humans wouldn't make the leap to the next star system. Now let's estimate low. Would a light year's travel time per light year be a fair estimate? Why exactly would the sphere of human influence stop at one star system? Humans (or whatever we'd evolve into) would not stop. Those who would stop would do so, others would take up the slack. Evolution in action right? So even when making a very pessimistic estimate - the high tech (posthuman) descendants of humanity should be able to leap a light year per century, and probably faster. These would not be single voyages, but a wave front of thousands and thousands of vessels, colonies, slow caravans or whatever. In case you were wondering that's an explosion of settlement flooding the galaxy in a few million years. If we assume technology we know - introduce FTL travel and it would be faster. Introduce posthuman robotic intelligence and it would be faster.
Now if we assume the universe is 13 billion years old, and there are hundreds or thousands (or more!) intelligent, tool using species out there some of them should be doing this, if only ever so modest. We are talking of industrial scale projects processing small moonlets and asteroids and capturing the emissions of stars at a hyper-efficient rate, and this happening in cycles of just a few million years. Yet we see nothing of that nature happening anywhere in the galaxy. Mind you, this should be happening if we make logical conclusions, but we do not. The galaxy is a very fertile place for industrial development and making hyper-technology colonies with alien robots and automated large mining facilities, and the emissions of such activity would radiate thousands of light years. Yet we see nothing of that nature. And as far as we can tell "they" haven't arrived here or left monoliths on the moon yet.
This is summarized in the "Fermi Paradox", or "The Great Silence". The question before us is "where the hell is everybody". A distant associate of mine did actually write an amazing paper on this topic (specifically - the filtering mechanism that weeds out technological, post-planetary civilizations) and you can find it here...
Rocket Propulsion elements by Sutton
And https://www.amazon.com/Engineering-Liquid-Propellant-Progress-Astronautics-Aeronautics/dp/1563470136
Thanks! Sounds like you have a good plan. I can't remember the exact book but I used something like this and put in the work to restore those ancient high school brain cells that know how to take aptitude tests. I took multiple practice tests and scored OK. Also did the study guides and practice tests for the army SIFT.
I did well on the actual tests using the strategies presented in the book. All in the 90's except my quant which was 70-something and tbh my weakest area is most definitely math so I was ready for that. I did visit the unit a few times and rubbed elbows, that's a very important part of the courtship that comes with rushing a Guard unit. Good luck!
>I never knew realized how intertwined UFO conspiracies are with ideas of
>white supremacy.
What, you don't know the theory that UFOs are Nazi man-made in origin?!?
Wake up, sheeple!
There are many books that the government did 9/11 too or that we didn't land on the moon but that doesn't make those claims true or the people who don't accept baseless claims, with no real evidence, in denial, it just means that morons will buy anything.
If you are okay with Calculus, I really liked Curtis' Orbital mechanics book. Real eye opener. The satellite paradox is especially cool.
Orbital Mechanics for Engineering Students (Aerospace Engineering) https://www.amazon.com/dp/0123747783/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_VEqXCbFAMVQ27
Introduction to Airborne Radar
Excellent technical book on radar systems, with an emphasis on military radar applications. The writer and several of his sources have worked at Raytheon for decades. As such much of the examples used appear to be similar to their own products (examples seem to follow the lines of the APG-65/73 series)
Very little math is needed to make it through the book.
https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Airborne-Radar-Aerospace-Systems/dp/1891121014
Mary Roach talks about this in her book Packing For Mars which I'd really recommend if this is the kind of thing you are curious about!
Diverses méthodes pour calculer, une fois les conditions initiales données, où un engin spatial sera après un temps t. Ou si on sait qu'il doit aller d'un point P1 à un point P2 en un temps t, quel est son trajet. Et comment optimiser un trajet dans le système solaire. En bref, de l'astrodynamique
BTW, this fits into everything I've read from some excellent books. Especially "Alien Agenda" by Jim Marrs.
http://www.amazon.com/Alien-Agenda-Jim-Marrs/dp/0061096865
The book presents many different parts of the Alien story from the history of the moon -- stranger and more unexplained than you might think -- to remote viewers working for the US military who constantly saw alien UFOs shadowing our subs and hovering over bases to past meetings with Presidents.
Basically, one version of the stories abductees and others say is that we are the subject of a long breeding project of the Aliens. That the Greys created us through genetic engineering and that they are re-making themselves through genetic engineering by taking some of our genes and inserting them into them or through alien/human breeding.
I realize how crazy this sounds but remember, Betty Andreason's abduction in the 70s? She describes a process where the aliens put a thin glass tube in her navel to try and harvest her eggs but she was sterile. This is very close to the proceedure gyne's use today but it hadn't been invented for another 20 years.
No, that's wrong. Here's a link to Sled Driver: http://www.amazon.com/Sled-Driver-Flying-Fastest-Aeroplane/dp/1857800028/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1323895135&sr=1-2
I think it's out of print, so Amazon only has used copies available?
The alternative to the theory that we never went there is that they went and found all kinds of alien stuff up there and went to extreme lengths to hide it, same as is happening now with Mars.
https://www.amazon.com/Dark-Mission-History-Enlarged-Revised/dp/1932595481/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1485769328&sr=1-1&keywords=dark+mission
one of the best books i've read is called "sail power" by Wallace ross??/
http://www.amazon.com/Sail-Power-Complete-Guide-Handling/dp/0394727150
The latest one i picked up is;
http://www.amazon.com/Keelboat-Sportsboat-Racing-Glyn-Charles/dp/1898660379/ref=sr_1_9?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1380591287&sr=1-9&keywords=keelboat
Also quite possibly flying saucers and time travel. If you like Nazi conspiracies, this book is a must-have:
http://www.amazon.com/Hunt-Zero-Point-Classified-Antigravity/dp/0767906284/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1408152228&sr=1-1&keywords=hunt+for+zero+point
Written by an editor for Jane's Defense Weekly.
Example
Course: Intro to Gas Dynamics
Textbook: Modern Compressible Flow with historical perspective, John D. Anderson Jr.
How useful is this textbook for future courses as a reference? Should I buy it new or used?
https://www.amazon.com/Moon-Landing-Hoax-Eagle-Landed/dp/1906512477
Read some books, you muppet
You’ve been brainwashed