STEM SPACE stuff

[klier]

Space is so fascinating and the older I get, one of my fav things to do is drive into a desolate space far from a city and point a telescope at the sky.. just insane.

I remember seeing the stars when I was a kid.

 

[Matski]

I remember seeing the stars when I was a kid.

They're still there...

 

[klier]

They're still there...

I don't believe you.

 

[WBarnes]

They're still there...

But they're slightly further away now.

 

[klier]

But they're slightly further away now.

The ones we (not me) can see aren't.

 

[WBarnes]

The ones we (not me) can see aren't.

All of them are further away because the universe is expanding. The ones we can't see are just moving away faster than the speed of light, or rather they have been since billions of years ago. Even some of the ones we can see now are moving away faster than light, but they weren't when the light left them. Stars in this galaxy maybe not, I'm not sure about that, I think it's the space inbetween. In fact the Milky Way and Adromeda are bound apparently.

Galaxies, the expanding universe, and the Big Bang

Stars are so far away, they appear as unresolved points of light, even through modern telescopes. But seventeenth-century astronomers noticed a number of other objects in the sky that were extended and often fuzzy looking.

press.princeton.edu

 

[klier]

All of them are further away because the universe is expanding. The ones we can't see are just moving away faster than the speed of light, or rather they have been since billions of years ago. Even some of the ones we can see now are moving away faster than light, but they weren't when the light left them. Stars in this galaxy maybe not, I'm not sure about that, I think it's the space inbetween. In fact the Milky Way and Adromeda are bound apparently.

Galaxies, the expanding universe, and the Big Bang

Stars are so far away, they appear as unresolved points of light, even through modern telescopes. But seventeenth-century astronomers noticed a number of other objects in the sky that were extended and often fuzzy looking.

press.princeton.edu

Yep, the stars we can see all are within the Milky Way and the Milky Way is not expanding. We can actually see the Andromeda Galaxy with our own eyes (again, not me), and even that one is moving TOWARDS us.

The expanding universe is only at the largest of scales, the void between galaxies and galaxy clusters.

 

[WBarnes]

Successful launch of most powerful LV ever, at 250t expendable payload. Landing still has a few niggles to work on though for 150t reusable capacity.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

https://www.spacex.com/vehicles/sta...orld's most,and 250 metric tonnes expendable.

 

[WBarnes]

 

[klier]

Well, the first part went very well. The second part for both the booster and starship not so much....... They will likely work it out, but the whole program is definitely not going to make its dates. This rocket is still pretty far from carrying actual humans; re-entering the atmosphere is no fun if your ship is completely out of control and the heat shields can't do their work. We saw it disintegrating literally before our eyes...... but my Gosh stunning visuals.

 

[WBarnes]

Well, the first part went very well. The second part for both the booster and starship not so much....... They will likely work it out, but the whole program is definitely not going to make its dates. This rocket is still pretty far from carrying actual humans; re-entering the atmosphere is no fun if your ship is completely out of control and the heat shields can't do their work. We saw it disintegrating literally before our eyes...... but my Gosh stunning visuals.

As an expendable LV it works fine though. Once upon a time that was considered an immense success, especially if it could launch 250 metric tonnes.

 

[klier]

As an expendable LV it works fine though. Once upon a time that was considered an immense success, especially if it could launch 250 metric tonnes.

Launching 250 tonnes is indeed mad. But what is equally mad is the sheer size of objects able to go inside: I believe (not entirely sure), that Starship would have been able to lift the Webb telescope unfolded. Which means it would have saved around $9.5 billion in R&D (and even more when measured in time).

 

[Sunny]

I believe (not entirely sure), that Starship would have been able to lift the Webb telescope unfolded.

With the JWT's sunshield deployed I don't think so. Per wikipedia JWT's Sunshield is it is 70' x 46'. While the diameter of the Startship is only 30' and actual payload bay is 56'x26'. But it could have definitely fit the mirror as is with out folding it and used a much simpler/cheaper/less riskier mechanism.

 

[Matski]

Might be a tight fit....

 

[klier]

With the JWT's sunshield deployed I don't think so. Per wikipedia JWT's Sunshield is it is 70' x 46'. While the diameter of the Startship is only 30' and actual payload bay is 56'x26'. But it could have definitely fit the mirror as is with out folding it and used a much simpler/cheaper/less riskier mechanism.

Yeah, I meant the mirrors. The shield is too big but could have been far less complicated partially folded inside.

 

[Sunny]

Yeah, I meant the mirrors. The shield is too big but could have been far less complicated partially folded inside.

The more interesting thing would be how much bigger telescope could they launch with the same folding mechanism using Starship. Hopefully there is a plan for one.

 

[Centurion]

Well, the first part went very well. The second part for both the booster and starship not so much....... They will likely work it out, but the whole program is definitely not going to make its dates. This rocket is still pretty far from carrying actual humans; re-entering the atmosphere is no fun if your ship is completely out of control and the heat shields can't do their work. We saw it disintegrating literally before our eyes...... but my Gosh stunning visuals.

I agree. They will need several more launches to test, learn and optimise the launch Starship.

The launch, hot staging and landing of such a huge and heavy object is like putting two W16 engines in a double decker bus and driving it around the ring very fast. Components will either fail or be compromised.

However Starship must have a gazillions temperature, g force and measurement sensors that records which capture data on the parts that need improving ahead of the next launch.

 

[klier]

The more interesting thing would be how much bigger telescope could they launch with the same folding mechanism using Starship. Hopefully there is a plan for one.

There's plans for giant telescopes on the moon. And of course the next big space telescope is already in the planning stages, the Nancy Grace Roman space telescope (to look for habitable worlds).

And here on earth we'll have the Extremely Large Telescope, ELT, in the Atacama desert. Which will be better in visible light than Hubble, from earth!

 

[klier]

Continueing, next to the ELT, the Vera C Rubin observatory is going catch first light early next year. Also in the Atacama desert I believe.
It will take pictures of the entire night sky every few days, looking for dark matter and dark energy. And stuff like the fabled Planet 9

And ESA just launched the Euclid telescope, which is absolutely amazing and opens up the night sky in entirely new ways.
Crazy times, exiting new hardware and many discoveries.

 

[martinbo]

Here's a not-so-random thought...

I wonder how many smug, virtue-signalling miles the Elon worshippers need to drive in their Teslas to offset the emissions produced by Starship.