Huge congratulations to the European Space Agency's Rosetta-satellite attaining orbit over the Churyumov-Gerasimenko Comet today, at a catching speed of 135,000 kilometers an hour (84,000mph) while matching 67P's solar-trajectory, slowing to 67P's 55,000kph speed. Sensor-signal delay is 22 minutes.
Rosetta will orbit 'triangularly' in-sympathy with the comet's tumbling, oblong shape. When the orbit shrinks to 30-kilometers the robot lander, Philae will deploy-down to the ice-surface.
This time next year will be the flyby of Sol
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/spacecraft-rosetta-arrives-at-comet-67p-after-decadelong-journey-20140806-100gux.html (http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/spacecraft-rosetta-arrives-at-comet-67p-after-decadelong-journey-20140806-100gux.html)
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/187582-europes-rosetta-becomes-the-first-spacecraft-to-orbit-a-real-live-comet (http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/187582-europes-rosetta-becomes-the-first-spacecraft-to-orbit-a-real-live-comet)
Churyumov-Gerasimenko is probably older than Earth.
That is just incredible.
Hmm... Why is it call a live comet. (https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1208.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc366%2FPlagueEleven%2FSmileys%2Fundecided.gif&hash=db88cdd595585472d8a4bb29597e2457b071fcb9)
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.extremetech.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F08%2Fcomet-67p-seen-by-rosetta-august-3-640x480.jpg&hash=5e68668583afc5007f11b22bb30fa82df90baa2f)
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.extremetech.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F08%2FChmielewski-3-full-640x480.jpg&hash=5db8fca9241fc5e2877e128356b22ca1ca7b5c44)
Quote from: walkstall on August 06, 2014, 09:09:50 PM
Hmm... Why is it call a live comet.
Don't read anything into that. It's just a toss-off headline -- a real, live comet!!
The comet is, of course, like all comets -- a dead chunk of rock.
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 06, 2014, 09:39:00 PM
Don't read anything into that. It's just a toss-off headline -- a real, live comet!!
The comet is, of course, like all comets -- a dead chunk of rock.
My grandkids tell me I ask way too many questions. :lol:
Quote from: walkstall on August 06, 2014, 09:46:51 PM
My grandkids tell me I ask way too many questions. :lol:
Think about it -- no human has ever seen a comet up close until this satellite made its rendezvous. So tempting to describe this remote-control encounter as a meeting with a 'real live comet.' :tounge:
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 06, 2014, 10:00:53 PM
Think about it -- no human has ever seen a comet up close until this satellite made its rendezvous. So tempting to describe this remote-control encounter as a meeting with a 'real live comet.' :tounge:
If I told my grandkid I saw a live comet, they would tell their grandmother I need a straitjacket. I might be able to slip that past me two great grandkids yet. :lol:
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 06, 2014, 09:39:00 PM
Don't read anything into that. It's just a toss-off headline -- a real, live comet!!
The comet is, of course, like all comets -- a dead chunk of rock.
You're so insensitive to the existence of rocks. "Hussein is dumber than a box of rocks" How do you think that makes the rocks "Feel"...You insensitive clod!
Damn, now I've insulted clods everywhere, sorry Hollywood, just a figure of speech, wasn't singling out any of you clods in particular. :laugh:
Quote from: kit saginaw on August 06, 2014, 08:45:11 PM
Huge congratulations to the European Space Agency's Rosetta-satellite attaining orbit over the Churyumov-Gerasimenko Comet today, at a catching speed of 135,000 kilometers an hour (84,000mph) while matching 67P's solar-trajectory, slowing to 67P's 55,000kph speed. Sensor-signal delay is 22 minutes.
Rosetta will orbit 'triangularly' in-sympathy with the comet's tumbling, oblong shape. When the orbit shrinks to 30-kilometers the robot lander, Philae will deploy-down to the ice-surface.
This time next year will be the flyby of Sol
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/spacecraft-rosetta-arrives-at-comet-67p-after-decadelong-journey-20140806-100gux.html (http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/spacecraft-rosetta-arrives-at-comet-67p-after-decadelong-journey-20140806-100gux.html)
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/187582-europes-rosetta-becomes-the-first-spacecraft-to-orbit-a-real-live-comet (http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/187582-europes-rosetta-becomes-the-first-spacecraft-to-orbit-a-real-live-comet)
Churyumov-Gerasimenko is probably older than Earth.
I doubt it is. Near the same age, sure. But older than Earth? To be older than Earth it would also have to be older than our solar system, according to the current theories about the creation of our, sun, planet, solar system. :)
Given the Earth, and our moon, (we now allegedly know thanks to moon rocks brought back by the apollo missions) are allegedly around 4.5 billion years old, and are thought to be nearly the same age as our star, now thought to be among the first bodies to coalesce from the solar disk created by our star.
The only way this comet could be older than the Earth, and the rest of the planets in our solar system, would be if it were created some where else in the galaxy/universe/cosmos, and was later captured by our stars gravity as it travelled through the cosmos.
Know how far it is, at light speed to reach our stars, closest companion star in the galaxy? Four years.
Nothing but light, travels that fast.
Voyager, the fastest man made object EVER, is going much faster than this comet.
It travels at the speed of 17 km/s and has only recently, after forty years of travel, left our heliopause and entered into interstellar space.
Care to guess how long it would take Voyager to reach our closest neighbor in the galaxy?
An Ion Drive spacecraft, Deep space 1, which was until only here very recently sci-fiction, would take about 81 thousand years to reach Sol's closest neighbor in the galaxy. If it were sent out there as voyager was, and if it's thrust were left on. Would take thousands of years to reach the nearest star system.
http://www.universetoday.com/15403/how-long-would-it-take-to-travel-to-the-nearest-star/ (http://www.universetoday.com/15403/how-long-would-it-take-to-travel-to-the-nearest-star/)
THIS COMET is much slower and would take much much longer to travel from one star to another.
So if this comet is older than Earth, this comet would be something very rare and worthy of our attention, something very special indeed, as it would be the ONLY celestial body in the solar system, in known existence for that matter, to be extra-solar.
It would be the only celestial body we've ever found, that we could point to and say, THAT CAME FROM ANOTHER STAR SYSTEM.
I am curious though, given it's unlikely this comet IS extra solar, what exactly is the point of this mission? To travel to a comet? Been there done that already. To prove we can land on one? Been there done that too.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/deepimpact/main/ (http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/deepimpact/main/)
We KNOW we can send a probe to a comet/asteroid. Hell we KNOW we can land on one too. The Deep Impact mission proved that.
Hell it even proved we can MOVE a comet if need be. ;)
So with this mission will they be doing any scientific tests on the comet?
Will we be checking it's composition to see what sorts of minerals are present?
Will we be looking to see if there are any organic molecules or compounds there?
Will we be looking for extremophile life that maybe riding on or hidden within it's ice?
Will we be looking for proof, or refutation of the pan-spermia theory?
If not, thanks for wasting yet some more money and valuable resources repeating science that's already been done, resources that could be put to better use here on Earth.
Lots of starving kids could be fed, lots of poor kids could be schooled, lots of people in need of medical care, could be helped with the money it takes for such a space mission ya know.
I"m all for science, especially space exploration, because that is our species future. (Different topic)
But, repeating the same things over and over again does nothing but waste time, money, and resources.
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 06, 2014, 09:39:00 PM
Don't read anything into that. It's just a toss-off headline -- a real, live comet!!
The comet is, of course, like all comets -- a dead chunk of rock.
I can see
Enquirer headlines now: ALIENS ON COMET OF DEATH.....
Quote from: Solar on August 07, 2014, 05:58:10 AM
You're so insensitive to the existence of rocks. "Hussein is dumber than a box of rocks" How do you think that makes the rocks "Feel"...You insensitive clod!
Damn, now I've insulted clods everywhere, sorry Hollywood, just a figure of speech, wasn't singling out any of you clods in particular. :laugh:
Insensitive? Glad to see I wasn't the
only one accused of that today! :ttoung: :lol:
Other than ore samples, just what does this gain for scientific knowledge, other than confirm earlier guesses about composition? Speaking of clods and such....
Quote from: walkstall on August 06, 2014, 09:46:51 PM
My grandkids tell me I ask way too many questions. :lol:
My wife does that to me. I don't argue with She Who Must be Obeyed..... :rolleyes:
Quote from: quiller on August 21, 2014, 12:24:13 AM
I can see Enquirer headlines now: ALIENS ON COMET OF DEATH.....
Oh yeah! "Ghost of Trayvon Martin sighted on Death Comet!!!" "JFK documents found on Death Comet... George W. Bush implicated!!!"
Quote from: quiller on August 21, 2014, 12:29:07 AM
Insensitive? Glad to see I wasn't the only one accused of that today! :ttoung: :lol:
Other than ore samples, just what does this gain for scientific knowledge, other than confirm earlier guesses about composition? Speaking of clods and such....
Why waste the money going all the way into space, when all we have to do is tap open a Dim and get the same results.
No sentient life available. :biggrin:
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 06, 2014, 10:00:53 PM
Think about it -- no human has ever seen a comet up close until this satellite made its rendezvous. So tempting to describe this remote-control encounter as a meeting with a 'real live comet.' :tounge:
Thats wholly untrue T-bone. The U.S. with it's "Deep Impact" mission has already been to a comet. Slamming a probe into one in fact just to see if we could "move" it at all.
In fact that mission did some of the science behind the next comet/asteroid mission.
Which is going to be NASA claims, to "capture" one and put it into geo-sync orbit out near the moon.
Which I personally think is a bad idea. Mankind doesn't know enough yet about the cosmos to start trying to monkey around with, and move celestial bodies around in our solar system.
I mean what happens if in the course of "capturing" one they cause it to slam into Earth instead by accident?
"Oh our bad, sorry your city (County, state, nation depending on how large the rock is and what it's made of) was wiped out along with millions of folks who lived there".....I mean it's not exactly as if there haven't been "mistakes" and "accidents" in space exploration before.
Besides, whats the benefit to us of going to comets and asteroids?
Can we colonize them? NO
Can we obtain resources there such as coal or oil?
NO
The only thing of use on one besides the water/ice.
Are the metals like Gold, Silver, Platinum, Iron, Nickel etc.... And mining them for those, will NOT benefit the common folks one wit or iota.
In fact if anything all it will serve to do is create more economic turmoil.
For example, just imagine if suddenly we wake up one morning and the price of Gold or Silver or Platinum goes through the floor on the world markets because someone's found, and brought bace tons of these metals, from a chunk of Gold or Silver out there the size of Mt. Mckinley?
Hell we've already found a Diamond out there the size of a planet.
Whats it do the the economy if suddenly we can mine it too?
Suddenly entire national economies are in the toilet because their currencies are backed by Gold, Silver, and other "rare" minerals found here on Earth in limited quantities.
Which are no longer rare, or limited in quantity.
This mission like "Deep Impact" (which at least was attempting to research defending the planet against impact) is nothing but the waste of taxpayer money's to fund research into something which has zero benefit for the human race as a whole.
And which only benefits a small fraction of the populace.
Quote from: daidalos on August 21, 2014, 04:59:12 PM
Thats wholly untrue T-bone. The U.S. with it's "Deep Impact" mission has already been to a comet. Slamming a probe into one in fact just to see if we could "move" it at all.
In fact that mission did some of the science behind the next comet/asteroid mission.
Which is going to be NASA claims, to "capture" one and put it into geo-sync orbit out near the moon.
Which I personally think is a bad idea. Mankind doesn't know enough yet about the cosmos to start trying to monkey around with, and move celestial bodies around in our solar system.
I mean what happens if in the course of "capturing" one they cause it to slam into Earth instead by accident?
"Oh our bad, sorry your city (County, state, nation depending on how large the rock is and what it's made of) was wiped out along with millions of folks who lived there".....I mean it's not exactly as if there haven't been "mistakes" and "accidents" in space exploration before.
Besides, whats the benefit to us of going to comets and asteroids?
Can we colonize them? NO
Can we obtain resources there such as coal or oil?
NO
The only thing of use on one besides the water/ice.
Are the metals like Gold, Silver, Platinum, Iron, Nickel etc.... And mining them for those, will NOT benefit the common folks one wit or iota.
In fact if anything all it will serve to do is create more economic turmoil.
For example, just imagine if suddenly we wake up one morning and the price of Gold or Silver or Platinum goes through the floor on the world markets because someone's found, and brought bace tons of these metals, from a chunk of Gold or Silver out there the size of Mt. Mckinley?
Hell we've already found a Diamond out there the size of a planet.
Whats it do the the economy if suddenly we can mine it too?
Suddenly entire national economies are in the toilet because their currencies are backed by Gold, Silver, and other "rare" minerals found here on Earth in limited quantities.
Which are no longer rare, or limited in quantity.
This mission like "Deep Impact" (which at least was attempting to research defending the planet against impact) is nothing but the waste of taxpayer money's to fund research into something which has zero benefit for the human race as a whole.
And which only benefits a small fraction of the populace.
One day last week, my neighbor placed a cantaloupe on a cinderblock at our neighborhood firing range. I put a Hornady 52-grain hollow-point boattail match bullet through the center of it at around 3,200 fps, and got to watch the melon guts spray all over the place. It was fun as hell, but the experience did not leave me with a feeling that I had visited the cantaloupe, or become close to it in any way.
They did it... about 5-minutes ago... Congrats again, guys.
Rosetta bounced correctively, instantaneously firing landing harpoons which screwed-into the Comet-surface, firmly securing itself in-place. What an amazing engineering feat.
It's currently 'talking' to mission-control on a 30-minute telemetry-delay. Looks like they're 'un-boxing' the camera-apparatus now...
Quote from: kit saginaw on November 12, 2014, 08:23:09 AM
They did it... about 5-minutes ago... Congrats again, guys.
Rosetta bounced correctively, instantaneously firing landing harpoons which screwed-into the Comet-surface, firmly securing itself in-place. What an amazing engineering feat.
It's currently 'talking' to mission-control on a 30-minute telemetry-delay. Looks like they're 'un-boxing' the camera-apparatus now...
Excellent! I love unlocking questions man has been asking since first pondering the heavens.
It's amazing to think that in just over 100 years man has gone from learning to fly to being able to put a machine on a pristine frozen ball that's been circling our solar system for roughly 4.56 Billion years, and return scientific data back to Earth. We've come a long way. I suspect this mission will answer lot of questions about the formation of solid objects in stellar nebulas, as well as other questions about the early solar system that we still don't have answers to.
Quote from: Skeptic on November 13, 2014, 06:25:19 PM
It's amazing to think that in just over 100 years man has gone from learning to fly to being able to put a machine on a pristine frozen ball that's been circling our solar system for roughly 4.56 Billion years, and return scientific data back to Earth. We've come a long way. I suspect this mission will answer lot of questions about the formation of solid objects in stellar nebulas, as well as other questions about the early solar system that we still don't have answers to.
I've often thought that the advances in the field of flight have been breathtaking. Moving from the first sustained powered flight in 1903 to machines of war just 11 years later, though they were featherweight concoctions of wood and wire and fabric that flew at barely over 100 mph, and often as not shot machine guns through the arc of the wooden propeller. In 1927 one man flew a plane across the Atlantic Ocean, nonstop and alone. Ten years later, a German pilot flew over 400 mph in sustained level flight. Just a few years after that, a British engineer created the first jet engine, and a few years more saw the launch of the first rocket-powered ballistic missile. Mach 1 in a manned aircraft broken in 1947. Mach 4, 5, and 6 flights just ten years later in the X-15. Then space.
In less than 60 years, from first powered flight to space travel. Wow.
Quote from: daidalos on August 21, 2014, 04:59:12 PM
Thats wholly untrue T-bone. The U.S. with it's "Deep Impact" mission has already been to a comet. Slamming a probe into one in fact just to see if we could "move" it at all.
In fact that mission did some of the science behind the next comet/asteroid mission.
Which is going to be NASA claims, to "capture" one and put it into geo-sync orbit out near the moon.
Which I personally think is a bad idea. Mankind doesn't know enough yet about the cosmos to start trying to monkey around with, and move celestial bodies around in our solar system.
I mean what happens if in the course of "capturing" one they cause it to slam into Earth instead by accident?
"Oh our bad, sorry your city (County, state, nation depending on how large the rock is and what it's made of) was wiped out along with millions of folks who lived there".....I mean it's not exactly as if there haven't been "mistakes" and "accidents" in space exploration before.
Besides, whats the benefit to us of going to comets and asteroids?
Can we colonize them? NO
Can we obtain resources there such as coal or oil?
NO
The only thing of use on one besides the water/ice.
Are the metals like Gold, Silver, Platinum, Iron, Nickel etc.... And mining them for those, will NOT benefit the common folks one wit or iota.
In fact if anything all it will serve to do is create more economic turmoil.
For example, just imagine if suddenly we wake up one morning and the price of Gold or Silver or Platinum goes through the floor on the world markets because someone's found, and brought bace tons of these metals, from a chunk of Gold or Silver out there the size of Mt. Mckinley?
Hell we've already found a Diamond out there the size of a planet.
Whats it do the the economy if suddenly we can mine it too?
Suddenly entire national economies are in the toilet because their currencies are backed by Gold, Silver, and other "rare" minerals found here on Earth in limited quantities.
Which are no longer rare, or limited in quantity.
This mission like "Deep Impact" (which at least was attempting to research defending the planet against impact) is nothing but the waste of taxpayer money's to fund research into something which has zero benefit for the human race as a whole.
And which only benefits a small fraction of the populace.
The asteroid to be captured will only be a number of feet in length and width, purposely chosen so that in the unlikely event it crashed to earth, it would burn up in the atmosphere.
You never know what kind of spin off tech the space program will produce. The technology to create and enhance pictures of the moon went on to improve other neat inventions like CT scanners and MRIs. Also solar cells and water filtration tech was greatly advanced by NASA.
The truth is, it's silly to ask "whats something useful this mission will discover? What will we learn from it?"
If we knew what we would learn, we wouldn't have to run the mission.
We are seeking out those "unknown unknowns" things we don't even realize we don't know.
If humans survive long enough, we will have to redirect a comet or asteroid one day. It'd be nice if we had run a few similar missions before it became absolutely necessary.
I'd hate to go the way of the dinosaur because some people didn't think our space program was worth the 0.5% of the yearly budget it receives.
Just want to add one thing.
What was the point of sending a dog into space? What was the point of sending a tin can satellite that beeped back at us?
The average citizen received no benefit from those type things. However, learning how to put satellites in space lead to many useful things such as GPS, weather satellites, spy satellites, and better communication across the world.
These things would have seemed fantastical to people of the 50's and 60's. In that regard, this mission could be the first step of many other fantastic things. A comet could serve as an automated refueling station for example.
Just as it was hard to imagine GPS, because the computer technology was lacking at the time. It may be hard to imagine benefits from comets. What if 50 years from now, we have an increase in 3d printing on par with what we experienced with computers?
Suddenly you can send robots to a comet to set up 3d printing machines. Comets have gold, platinum, iron, rock, and several other metals. Interesting. A ship could be assembled autonomously. No need to lift everything into low earth orbit. The fuel could be made from the water that is present. Solar cells can provide the power for electrolysis. Split the water into hydrogen and oxygen, a fuel and an accelerant.
If NASA parks an asteroid or two and we find out that it/they contain precious metals, your first problem is mining and refining in space, to maximize the profit of bringing down that much ore (or whatever). Chopping the asteroid into big chunks wastes resources when you can clean out what you don't need and just ship the good stuff.
So it won't affect world markets unless and until it is on Earth. So much for economic alarmism.
But back to Step J above, where that mining and refining in space gets done, for without all that a permanent Moon base (and beyond) is financially impossible. (We'd have to mine the Moon for materials for even that start-up base.)
Think of the business opportunities in securing the franchise to clean up junk in orbit around our planet. Melt it all down, you might make something useful out of it.....
Quote from: quiller on November 16, 2014, 07:30:06 AM
If NASA parks an asteroid or two and we find out that it/they contain precious metals, your first problem is mining and refining in space, to maximize the profit of bringing down that much ore (or whatever). Chopping the asteroid into big chunks wastes resources when you can clean out what you don't need and just ship the good stuff.
So it won't affect world markets unless and until it is on Earth. So much for economic alarmism.
But back to Step J above, where that mining and refining in space gets done, for without all that a permanent Moon base (and beyond) is financially impossible. (We'd have to mine the Moon for materials for even that start-up base.)
Think of the business opportunities in securing the franchise to clean up junk in orbit around our planet. Melt it all down, you might make something useful out of it.....
Yep, you're right, and when accounting for orbital return of a comet that they've been chasing for nearly a decade?
How long would it be before a return flight to earth could actually pay for itself?
Without capturing a comet and locking it in earths orbit, mining these things is a waste of time and money, simply no return on investment.
Quote from: Solar on November 16, 2014, 07:56:23 AM
Yep, you're right, and when accounting for orbital return of a comet that they've been chasing for nearly a decade?
How long would it be before a return flight to earth could actually pay for itself?
Without capturing a comet and locking it in earths orbit, mining these things is a waste of time and money, simply no return on investment.
If the U.S. were to retrieve a space-object containing true rare earths which we now depend upon the Chinese or others to supply, this would vastly reduce influence of foreign computer makers and designers (read, their governments). National defense would come before any sharing of materials recovered (at whatever cost).
It would take years to reach the asteroid belts and more years for any kind of robotic scans for potentially viable objects-to-recover. Then would come the anchoring of tow-lines or any propulsion unit which could nominally NOT create a spin on the object which sends it off-course. (Meaning more than one such unit, to correct for over-steering.)
Did we mention the actual time it would take to get up to a speed where that same planetoid-thingie would reach us within a decade? When the reality meets the science-fiction writing, we have a TON of bugs to iron out before we start hauling ANYTHING away from ANYWHERE.
Quote from: quiller on November 16, 2014, 08:56:24 AM
If the U.S. were to retrieve a space-object containing true rare earths which we now depend upon the Chinese or others to supply, this would vastly reduce influence of foreign computer makers and designers (read, their governments). National defense would come before any sharing of materials recovered (at whatever cost).
It would take years to reach the asteroid belts and more years for any kind of robotic scans for potentially viable objects-to-recover. Then would come the anchoring of tow-lines or any propulsion unit which could nominally NOT create a spin on the object which sends it off-course. (Meaning more than one such unit, to correct for over-steering.)
Did we mention the actual time it would take to get up to a speed where that same planetoid-thingie would reach us within a decade? When the reality meets the science-fiction writing, we have a TON of bugs to iron out before we start hauling ANYTHING away from ANYWHERE.
Exactly the point, it would probably take a couple of centuries before something like this became viable, unless we develop a Star Trek type transporter.
Lets work on transporter technology first. :biggrin:
Quote from: Solar on November 16, 2014, 09:39:02 AM
Exactly the point, it would probably take a couple of centuries before something like this became viable, unless we develop a Star Trek type transporter.
Lets work on transporter technology first. :biggrin:
Okey-dokey, so we skip the rockets bearing construction modules up to the Moon, and we beam up a crew to run it. Assuming we didn't burn up the planetary energy supply to do it....
Um...Scotty? Are you there, Scotty? We're in the dark down here at Starfleet, Scotty, please come in.....
The rocket bearing the first 3D printer was recently destroyed, setting back serious 3D testing by perhaps a decade or more. I'll leave it to darker minds to ponder if someone just sabotaged our way around the costs of expansion into space....
I like the 3D-printer concept. Send out robotic space-dust collectors, ships in programmed-to-return arcs which suck in and crush small objects into raw materials for the printers. You can scoop a lot of that in and around an asteroid belt. You can find, separate and use a lot of useful material...if you can just test it so people will fund it.
Quote from: quiller on November 16, 2014, 11:22:07 AM
Okey-dokey, so we skip the rockets bearing construction modules up to the Moon, and we beam up a crew to run it. Assuming we didn't burn up the planetary energy supply to do it....
Um...Scotty? Are you there, Scotty? We're in the dark down here at Starfleet, Scotty, please come in.....
The rocket bearing the first 3D printer was recently destroyed, setting back serious 3D testing by perhaps a decade or more. I'll leave it to darker minds to ponder if someone just sabotaged our way around the costs of expansion into space....
I like the 3D-printer concept. Send out robotic space-dust collectors, ships in programmed-to-return arcs which suck in and crush small objects into raw materials for the printers. You can scoop a lot of that in and around an asteroid belt. You can find, separate and use a lot of useful material...if you can just test it so people will fund it.
Hell just tell b o there 6 black people up there. He would find all the funding that was needed. Hell E Holder would even make it a new law.
Quote from: quiller on November 16, 2014, 11:22:07 AM
Okey-dokey, so we skip the rockets bearing construction modules up to the Moon, and we beam up a crew to run it. Assuming we didn't burn up the planetary energy supply to do it....
Um...Scotty? Are you there, Scotty? We're in the dark down here at Starfleet, Scotty, please come in.....
The rocket bearing the first 3D printer was recently destroyed, setting back serious 3D testing by perhaps a decade or more. I'll leave it to darker minds to ponder if someone just sabotaged our way around the costs of expansion into space....
I like the 3D-printer concept. Send out robotic space-dust collectors, ships in programmed-to-return arcs which suck in and crush small objects into raw materials for the printers. You can scoop a lot of that in and around an asteroid belt. You can find, separate and use a lot of useful material...if you can just test it so people will fund it.
Silly boy, 3D printers are so yesterday, we'll just fire up the replicator. :biggrin:
The first 3D printed object in space was just manufactured on the ISS. Appropriately enough, it was a spare part for the printer itself. This was symbolically chosen to demonstrate the usefulness 3D printing can have in space. Manufacture your own replacement parts on site as needed instead of shipping up three of everything.
http://m.space.com/27861-3d-printer-space-station-first-part.html (http://m.space.com/27861-3d-printer-space-station-first-part.html)