Skip to main content
Topic: Money dumped in vast amounts for space? (Read 19033 times)

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #25
It was the show when they did weed on camera.
And to provide silly talking-points to flat-earthers, cynical greenies, an' a certain Scot whose name we won't mention! But, ersi, riddle me this: Was the "discovery" of America less a feat and fortuitous boon because Isabella finance it? :)
Elon Musk is not discovering anything. The entire latter half of last century was the space age. Space has already been discovered and all the relevant technology has been invented. Musk's Spacex is deploying the existing technology and calling it invention and discovery.

(You thought Trump was the naif who got the job -candidate, then presidency- by bluster and buffoonery?
Yes, Trump bluffed himself to the presidency. Bluster and buffoonery is his style of managing anything and everything. Putin's army of hackers helped a bit too, which might have been the tipping point.

These facts are not worrying by themselves. Rather, it is worrying that in USA such behaviour goes completely unpunished.

Same with Musk. It should have been somebody's job in his team to secure the licences to start drilling the city's underground. Well, breaches in the area of construction - particularly including outrageous breaches - go mostly unpunished here too.

Why do you seem like a fan of Musk? He is not even American.

Thanks for recommending Aristotle on politics to me!
There are those who assume that Ἀθηναίων πολιτεία is misattributed to Aristotle. I am solidly in that camp. I don't like anything written by Aristotle, but I like that book very much, so I'm sure it is not by Aristotle.

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #26
Elon Musk is not discovering anything. The entire latter half of last century was the space age. Space has already been discovered and all the relevant technology has been invented.
Neither -really- did Columbus... Certainly, not Isabella nor Spain, either! :)
Musk "discovered" how to get teams of engineers to pursue a technological advance only commonplace in pulp fiction: Re-usable, self-returning boosters. The damn things flip during descent and safely (usually :) sit their ass fins down on dry (relatively) land! Do you have any idea of the cost savings that single advance will net? And the rebirth of inspiration the sight of such, "live and direct" as Edison Carter used to say (TV show, Max Headroom...) might instil. You surely don't mean to tell me that America's space program wasn't anemic at best, sclerotic and feeble at worst, before SpaceX? Hell, we had to pay the Russians to ferry our astronauts to ISS; and we'd been using the Russian-made Atlas boosters for everything less than military hush-hush missions since our "space detente" in the '80s... The dream of space had become just a jumble of pastel promises put on editorial whiteboards beside all the black-and-white bad news (...in living color, of course!)!
It's true that NASA continued good work, with robotics and long-term probes... Which the public just wasn't excited by. John Q. and Ivan D. no longer cared. In the smaller democracies (...please, let's not quibble over that terminology), I'd bet Howie's attitude is the most prevalent one:
"I've got my telly, but the shows are no good because Gov.fu wastes so much money on egghead's dreams. I could eat better, if we  never "explored" beyond the tip of our noses, mate! And the fools who risk their lives to go -- essentially nowhere, take money that could have paid for my retirement..." is what you hear from un-interested people. And politicians who dream big things are relegated to the Also-Rans category, accomplishing never more than pyric programs like the Space Shuttle...
Even people who know better shrug off the chance of EMP-calamity, knowing less than 1 trillion $ U.S, would obviate the dangers of another Carrington Event, let alone a malicious nuke attack from a belligerent bad-guy country.
I'm tired. And you're too young to be such a cynic, my friend...

I don't like anything written by Aristotle, but I like that book very much, so I'm sure it is not by Aristotle.
:) You used to sing a different tune! (Have you accepted the Frege/Pierce modern logic of quantification at last? Whence came syllogism? :)
I'll agree he (Aristotle) was wrong about almost everything he wrote about. Like his teacher before him, he was a mediocre student. (Oh, if only Socrates had refused the hemlock and avoided his kangaroo court date! Think of all the pomposity and stubborn wrongheadedness he might have pilloried as an itinerant gadfly!?
But no. A systematizer (Plato-the Sourpuss) took up Ethics and -the gods help us!- epistemology and even ontology! (Luckily for some, he'd not forgot his childhood tales of Atlantis! :) )
Your reasoning above requires a universe of discourse severely limited -- by what your schoolmaster gave you to work with...  Where -if anywhere-would your sense of adventure take you, if only you'd let it?
_____________
Did you ever read C. Northcote Parkinson's book on political science via history? I know I recommended it to you... (Since the book was never translated -form plain English to academic gobbledygook- it might be hard to find: Let me know, huh?
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman
 (iBook G4 - Panther | Mac mini i5 - El Capitan)

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #27
Do you have any idea of the cost savings that single advance will net?
Space Shuttles have been tried. It turned out "pyric" as you say.

For dense usage of near-earth rockets, there needs to be a market somewhere for cargo and public transportation that airplanes cannot fill. The rockets should provide at least a significant load or speed or maintenance advantage. They are not providing any of it.

Electric cars are not properly taking off either. They are good only for short distances, and luckily for them, most driving is over short distances. Over longer distances, where you need to refill, combustion engines are still much better - refill in minutes and continue.

Somehow the awesome Tesla engineers have not even come up with the idea that the electric car batteries could be removable: Arrive at the refill station, give away your empty batteries, put new charged batteries in the car and continue. It would be somewhat faster, I suppose. If not, then electric cars can only survive by forcing them by regulation.

Overall the entire idea of electric cars as eco-friendly is misguided. To be eco-friendly, we absolutely do not need more cars. We need to drastically reduce the number of cars.

And you're too young to be such a cynic, my friend...
I'm older than Emacs!

I don't like anything written by Aristotle, but I like that book very much, so I'm sure it is not by Aristotle.
:) You used to sing a different tune! (Have you accepted the Frege/Pierce modern logic of quantification at last? Whence came syllogism? :)
Aristotle can be credited with formulating the syllogism, but valid deductive reasoning definitely precedes him. Quantification is secondary and rests the syllogism.

I have heard that in Bangladesh people have lots of respect for Vivekananda, but hardly any respect for Ramakrishna. I wonder what they make of the fact that Ramakrishna was Vivekananda's guru, not the other way.

Did you ever read C. Northcote Parkinson's book on political science via history? I know I recommended it to you... (Since the book was never translated -form plain English to academic gobbledygook- it might be hard to find: Let me know, huh?
First read what's easily available online. Of course exercise your discernment to find what is valuable.

 

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #28
Somehow the awesome Tesla engineers have not even come up with the idea that the electric car batteries could be removable: Arrive at the refill station, give away your empty batteries, put new charged batteries in the car and continue. It would be somewhat faster, I suppose. If not, then electric cars can only survive by forcing them by regulation.
I imagine it's very much a matter of cost of some sort. The concept is beyond obvious after all.

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #29
Yes, the concept is obvious, and the benefits for the consumer are obvious. Yet e.g. in mobile phones the development was to make batteries non-removable precisely to make things worse for everybody. It's the way progress works.

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #30
I know Howie is talking about the Space Force, but cryptocurrency investments are doing quite well right now.

How I regret not accepting those 20 Bitcoin that kindly Scot I met at a party offered me back in 2011. :(

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #31
Somehow the awesome Tesla engineers have not even come up with the idea that the electric car batteries could be removable: Arrive at the refill station, give away your empty batteries, put new charged batteries in the car and continue. It would be somewhat faster, I suppose. If not, then electric cars can only survive by forcing them by regulation.
I imagine it's very much a matter of cost of some sort. The concept is beyond obvious after all.

Two (or three) worlds

The initial attraction of Tesla, presumably what attracted Musk to join Tesla in the first placce, was the faster, smoother sports car. The electrical motor is superior to the combustion engine, but the battery is an inferior energy store.

Nio was not the first Chinese company with swappable batteries. I trace that evolution back to this beauty:

Spotted in China: Xiaoshuidi Electric Vehicle



Not the first electric car by any means, but one of the prettiest. The goal was obviously not a sleek sports car, but a way to get where you want cheaply. Crucially it was powered by a good old (and cheap) lead acid car battery, and those batteries are standardised, and thus swappable. 

There were earlier pioneers, like the Norwegian Pivco/Think Global, that preceded either by a decade. Neither sleek nor cheap, but environmentally conscious, it never achieved commercial success.




That car was basically a driving battery. In that regards it reminds me of the Scania NXT concept vehicle. The concept is to swap hoods, so that it can be a bus at day, a cargo truck at night, but all that means is that you can swap the drive train. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7N3elygeUA4



Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #32
Neither sleek nor cheap, but environmentally conscious, it never achieved commercial success.
That's the fallacy of electric cars - being environmentally conscious. The only thing that can be environmentally conscious is to reduce drastically the number of cars.
A matter of attitude.

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #33
Yes, that was badly phrased. The number of cars is the main problem, but switching to electric motors helps a lot. Roughly speaking an EV has half the lifetime emissions of an ICE vehicle (1/6th in the best case). But if there are twice as many EVs as there are petrol cars today, little is won (though by that time "best case" ought to be normal case). They are still cars though they pollute less and are less noisy.

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #34
In meatbag news:

But there's exciting news: Russia and China are going to jointly build a lunar scientific research station! On the moon's surface, or perhaps in orbit... No time-line given.
Somewhat related: NASA tasks SpaceX to take Americans back to the moon.

As in China, Russia open moon base project to international partners, early details emerge

I can't contain my excitement.

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #35
They need international partners? we are a fantastic international partner.
The lunar station needs a forum and we are the best.  :up:
A matter of attitude.


Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #37
Humans Will Never Colonize Mars


Quote
The suggestion that humans will soon set up bustling, long-lasting colonies on Mars is something many of us take for granted. What this lofty vision fails to appreciate, however, are the monumental—if not intractable—challenges awaiting colonists who want to permanently live on Mars. Unless we radically adapt our brains and bodies to the harsh Martian environment, the Red Planet will forever remain off limits to humans.

Mars is the closest thing we have to Earth in the entire solar system, and that’s not saying much.



The Red Planet is a cold, dead place, with an atmosphere about 100 times thinner than Earth’s. The paltry amount of air that does exist on Mars is primarily composed of noxious carbon dioxide, which does little to protect the surface from the Sun’s harmful rays. Air pressure on Mars is very low; at 600 Pascals, it’s only about 0.6 percent that of Earth. You might as well be exposed to the vacuum of space, resulting in a severe form of the bends—including ruptured lungs, dangerously swollen skin and body tissue, and ultimately death. The thin atmosphere also means that heat cannot be retained at the surface. The average temperature on Mars is -81 degrees Fahrenheit (-63 degrees Celsius), with temperatures dropping as low as -195 degrees F (-126 degrees C). By contrast, the coldest temperature ever recorded on Earth was at Vostok Station in Antarctica, at -128 degrees F (-89 degrees C) on June 23, 1982. Once temperatures get below the -40 degrees F/C mark, people who aren’t properly dressed for the occasion can expect hypothermia to set in within about five to seven minutes.



Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #38
So now the Chinese have beaten Soviet Union/Russia in Mars missions, due to the latter's "Mars curse".

On the other hand the Soviet Union had a much more impressive record in landing on Venus. Now that's a real man's planet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2t2LyC4sSV0

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #39
SN15 did not explode on landing :(

Good news: It will be reused until it does :)

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CZTLogln34[/video]

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #40
So now there are three rovers driving around on Mars at the same time, will need to put traffic lights up there soon. At least the US and China are both right-hand drive countries.



So the current game score is, total (currently active):

USASU/RusEuroChinaIndiaArab
Orbiting7 (3)5 (0)2 (2)1 (1)1 (1)1 (1)
Landing7 (1)3 (0)1 (0)1 (1)
Controlled landing5 (1)2 (0)1 (0)1 (1)
Successful landing5 (1)1 (1)
Rover5 (2)1 (1)
Aircraft1 (1)

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #41
Several small steps for meatbaggery this summer.

June was the month for sinobags, while Zhurong was still trundling over Mars. When the taikonauts had their spacewalk, there was a a sudden interest in the Space Cow.



And July is the month for the moneybags. While the 71 year old Virgin launched his latest scheme for multibillionaires to make money from multimillionaires, Amazon is about to deliver their chief operating package into orbit. 

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #42
Can't wait for the first robot combat in Mars.

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #43
Martian martial machines?

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #44
And July is the month for the moneybags. While the 71 year old Virgin launched his latest scheme for multibillionaires to make money from multimillionaires, Amazon is about to deliver their chief operating package into orbit.
They both returned. What a useless waste. To properly deliver a package, the package should reach the destination and stay there!

Even Aussies think that Bezos' rocket is a joke.

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkM4iySAByI[/video]


Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #46
Hard to tell what Zhurong and Perseverance will be up now that Mars is on the opposite side of the Sun.

But for "money dumped in vast amounts for space" we can look forward to the James Webb space telescope (JWST) launch in December. Even assuming it survives the launch, the 10 gigabuck telescope will have a limited shelf life, and there will be no battery chance or other maintenance. But the views

https://youtu.be/b6AdjzJhWYQ

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #47
Given how its development has went so far, my money is on the rocket exploding before it gets to orbit.

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #48


Lucy on the way 




(picture of an artist)

Re: Money dumped in vast amounts for space?

Reply #49
"Lucy is named for a famous female Australopithecus afarensis fossil found in Ethiopia that, as a relative of modern humans, helped illuminate the evolution of our species. It is hoped that the spacecraft Lucy will similarly elucidate our solar system's earliest days."
I am pretty sure they linked that name to a song by four boys from Liverpool.