Ted McGregor Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Phil Deakins wrote: What does Richard Branson have to do with it? You mentioned frivolous spending of space-projects earlier to someone else. Hence. I don't even criticise the ESA. I criticise the governments. They are the ones that funded all this stuff. If that is so ( the ESA received the funding from the government(s) ) it's really you, me and all the rest of the EU. Knowing whether or not comets could have brought the water gains us nothing. We disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 The current status of the probe is that they have decided to drill now because, due to it's failure to secure on landing, and it ending up where it wasn't intended to be, its batteries may not last much longer. They know that drilling may push it off into space anyway and the whole project may turn out to have been a failure.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 TDD123 wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: What does Richard Branson have to do with it? You mentioned frivolous spending of space-projects earlier to someone else. Hence. But he and his passengers aren't using public money. I don't even criticise the ESA. I criticise the governments. They are the ones that funded all this stuff. If that is so ( the ESA received the funding from the government(s) ) it's really you, me and all the rest of the EU. We are all paying for it, yes, but we didn't decide to spend the money in that way. Knowing whether or not comets could have brought the water gains us nothing. We disagree. Fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted McGregor Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Phil Deakins wrote: TDD123 wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: Knowing whether or not comets could have brought the water gains us nothing. We disagree. Fine. True .. :robothappy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillon Levenque Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Thank you for a very informative post, Freya. When I mentioned earlier the gains in 'hard science' that are surely being made with this project I was just thinking in general, earthbound terms. I hadn't even considered that a lot of it could be applied directly to similar but differently purposed missions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madelaine McMasters Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Freya Mokusei wrote: Enjoy your respective weekends, and thanks if you read the whole thing. You're welcome, enjoy your weekend too! And I hope some of that weekend enjoyment comes from the arts, which I believe are as necessary to our survival as science and are often subjected to the same ridicule. Science will make our future possible, art will make it desireable. I believe Philae's landing on Comet P67 was both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Mokusei Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 You're welcome, people! I hope I didn't sound too negative, I've seen a lot of excellent contributions here - a lot that's improved my knowledge on this particular project. Just on initial reading the noise-to-signal was high. Facts help, yesyes. I especially liked what Kelli said about space experimentation not happening in a vacuum (page 2). If this doesn't at least end up on a t-shirt I'll be sorely disappointed. Space exploration is an iterative process - just like every frontier that humanity has eventually come to master, we'll keep trying new things. Greatness builds on top of greatness, and there's always something new that can help us out down here. Thanks Maddy! This weekend arts is leading the way, now that I've found a nice rooftop to enjoy the view! Music by the wonderful Santana to begin. Played through neodynium, naturally! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynda Baran Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Since a lot of the coverage on the landing was pushed to the side for coverage of pictures and stories about Kim Kardashian's bum it seems to me they might have been better served landing a probe on her assteroid The benefits would have been: It's almost as big as the one in space. It's easier to find and reach. It would have saved years and billions to accomplish. No one knows what would likely be found there either. It is more hospitable for future manned probes and exploration. ESA could have probably financed it with a spin off reality show, and no one watching it would have been offended about the scientist's choice of shirt. And as an engineer, I'd like to know how the damn thing seems to defy the laws of physics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted McGregor Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Kanye West whines : 'She no assteroid .. she no hobbit. ' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coby Foden Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Phil Deakins wrote: They know that drilling may push it off into space anyway and the whole project may turn out to have been a failure.. Had you studied the facts about the mission, you would have known better. Even if Philea slips out into space the whole project will not turn into a failure. The mission has been, and is a great success. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Let's see: What's on board Rosetta? • Rosetta orbiter -The orbiter's scientific payload includes 11 experiments, in addition to the lander. 01. Ultraviolet Imaging Spectrometer - ALICE will analyse gases in the coma and tail and measure the comet’s production rates of water and carbon monoxide and dioxide. It will provide information on the surface composition of the nucleus. 02. Comet Nucleus Sounding Experiment - CONSERT will probe the comet’s interior by studying radio waves reflected and scattered by the nucleus. 03. Cometary Secondary Ion Mass Analyser - COSIMA will analyse the characteristics of dust grains emitted by the comet, such as their composition and whether they are organic or inorganic. 04. Grain Impact Analyser and Dust Accumulator – GIADA will measure the number, mass, momentum and velocity distribution of dust grains coming from the cometary nucleus and other directions (deflected by solar radiation pressure). 05. Micro-Imaging Dust Analysis System - MIDAS will study the dust around the comet. It will provide information on particle population, size, volume and shape. 06. Microwave Instrument for the Rosetta Orbiter - MIRO will determine the abundances of major gases, the surface outgassing rate and the nucleus subsurface temperature. 07. Optical, Spectrocopic and Infrared Remote Imaging System - OSIRIS has a wide-angle camera and narrow-angle camera that can obtain high-resolution images of the comet’s nucleus. 08. Rosetta Orbiter Spectrometer for Ion and Neutral Analysis - ROSINA will determine the composition of the comet’s atmosphere and ionosphere, the velocities of electrified gas particles and reactions in which they take part. 09. Rosetta Plasma Consortium - RPC will measure the physical properties of the nucleus, examine the structure of the inner coma, monitor cometary activity, and study the comet’s interaction with the solar wind. 10. Radio Science Investigation - RSI will, by using shifts in the spacecraft’s radio signals, measure the mass, density and gravity of the nucleus, define the comet’s orbit, and study the inner coma. 11. Visible and Infrared Mapping Spectrometer - VIRTIS will map and study the nature of the solids and the temperature on the surface. It will also identify comet gases, characterise the physical conditions of the coma and help to identify the best landing sites. • Philae lander - The lander carries nine experiments. A drill will sample the subsurface material. 01. Alpha Proton X-ray Spectrometer - APXS. Lowered to within 4 cm of the ground, APXS will detect alpha particles and X-rays to gather information on the elemental composition of the comet’s surface. 02. Rosetta Lander Imaging System- CIVA/ROLIS is a CCD camera that will obtain high-resolution images during descent and stereo panoramic images of areas sampled by other instruments. Six identical micro-cameras will take panoramic pictures of the surface. A spectrometer will study the composition, texture and albedo (reflectivity) of samples collected from the surface. 03. Comet Nucleus Sounding - CONSERT will probe the internal structure of the nucleus. Radio waves from CONSERT will travel through the nucleus and will be returned by a transponder on the lander. 04. Cometary Sampling and Composition experiment - COSAC is one of two ‘evolved gas analysers’. It will detect and identify complex organic molecules from their elemental and molecular composition. 05. Evolved Gas Analyser - MODULUS PTOLEMY is another evolved gas analyser that will obtain accurate measurements of isotopic ratios of light elements. 06. Multi-Purpose Sensor for Surface and Subsurface Science - Mupus will use sensors on the lander’s anchor, probe and exterior to measure the density, thermal and mechanical properties of the surface. 07. Rosetta Lander Magnetometer and Plasma Monitor - Romap is a magnetometer and plasma monitor that will study the local magnetic field and the interaction between the comet and the solar wind. 08. Sample and Distribution Device - SD2 will drill more than 20 cm into the surface, collect samples and deliver them to different ovens or for microscope inspection. 09. Surface Electrical, Seismic and Acoustic Monitoring Experimens - SESAME's three instruments will measure properties of the comet’s outer layers. The Cometary Acoustic Sounding Surface Experiment will measure the way sound travels through the surface. The Permittivity Probe will investigate its electrical characteristics, and the Dust Impact Monitor will measure dust falling back to the surface. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - As you can see this mission is not a question only about the origin of water. Lots of experiments will be done to study the comet, to find out as much as possible about the comet with these instruments. All the data will be very valuable information for any future missions (surely this will not be the last one). Besides the data gained by these experiments, additional information and experience in space travel and landing onto a celestial body was gained. All this information is of great value for future missions. As Philea's landing did not go as well as was planned it is a good lesson - for future missions a safer way of landing must be invented and developed. We learn also from mistakes; "let's make it better next time". This kind of thing has happened many times in space exploration. Exploring comets and asteroids is as important as is the study of the planets. Besides, comets and asteroids are easier source for materials to be transported to earth than any planet is. Slowing down space exploration, due to some present earth issues, would be very short sighted thing to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madelaine McMasters Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 TDD123 wrote: Kanye West whines : 'She no assteroid .. she no hobbit. ' - climbs to the top of her basement stairs to announce that you can hide wrinkles around the mouth by kissing a rabbit... ...if you're allergic to rabbits. The pouty lips are a bonus! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted McGregor Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Madelaine McMasters wrote: ...if you're allergic to rabbits. The pouty lips are a bonus! There must to be some prettig big ass rabbits inhabiting California then .. :robotindifferent: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted November 15, 2014 Share Posted November 15, 2014 Yes, saying that the whole thing will have been a failure was wrong. The Rosetta craft will still contiue with the comet. The lander is already out of power and may never get any more, so that part of the projetc's success may well be limited to what it's already done - drill a bit and send that data back. If they get any more from it, it'll just be through sheer luck. It may already be dead. They should find out in about 11 minutes from now. I still hold strongly to my view that the whole mission was money badly spent, simply because, I adopted that view about this project when it was thought that the whole thing would accomplish all that was intended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coby Foden Posted November 15, 2014 Share Posted November 15, 2014 http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/nov/14/rosetta-philae-lander-hop-comet "Philae’s primary mission was always designed to last around 60 hours on its initial battery charge. But engineers covered the spacecraft in solar panels in the hope that sunlight could charge a set of secondary batteries and extend the mission for months. Despite the awkward landing, by Friday Stephan Ulamec, Philae lander manager, estimated that 80% of the science Esa was hoping for had been achieved. If the drilling operation succeeded in delivering samples to onboard instruments it would rise to 90%, he said." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coby Foden Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Phil Deakins wrote: I still hold strongly to my view that the whole mission was money badly spent, simply because, I adopted that view about this project when it was thought that the whole thing would accomplish all that was intended. I found some interesting piece of information about the Rosetta mission and dogs. :smileyhappy: • The total cost of the Rosetta mission during its 21 years lifespan is: €1.40 billion ($1.74 billion) According to: http://www.americanpetproducts.org/press_industrytrends.asp • In the USA for dog toys (yes, dog toys) the money spent yearly is: €1.87 billion ($2.32 billion) :smileysurprised: So, ESA was able to make this very exciting space mission with less money than what is spent on dog toys in the USA, in one year. Looking in this perspective the mission was not expensive at all. And where exactly is this Rosetta now? Interesting solar system animation showing planets and their trajectories up to Jupiter. Rosetta and the comet with their trajectories are included too. http://sci.esa.int/where_is_rosetta/ (There have been some tweets that "scientists are confident that Philea will wake up from hibernation when the comet gets closer to the sun" [somewhere in the spring 2015].) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madelaine McMasters Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Coby Foden wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: I still hold strongly to my view that the whole mission was money badly spent, simply because, I adopted that view about this project when it was thought that the whole thing would accomplish all that was intended. I found some interesting piece of information about the Rosetta mission and dogs. :smileyhappy: • The total cost of the Rosetta mission during its 21 years lifespan is: €1.40 billion ($1.74 billion) According to: http://www.americanpetproducts.org/press_industrytrends.asp • In the USA for dog toys (yes, dog toys) the money spent yearly is: €1.87 billion ($2.32 billion) :smileysurprised: So, ESA was able to make this very exciting space mission with less money than what is spent on dog toys in the USA, in one year. Looking in this perspective the mission was not expensive at all. And where exactly is this Rosetta now? Interesting solar system animation showing planets and their trajectories up to Jupiter. Rosetta and the comet with their trajectories are included too. http://sci.esa.int/where_is_rosetta/ (There have been some tweets that "scientists are confident that Philea will wake up from hibernation when the comet gets closer to the sun" [somewhere in the spring 2015].) That's a lovely animation, Coby! I enjoyed watching Rosetta slingshot off Earth in March of 2005, then off Mars in February of 2007, then off Earth again in November 2007 and finally again in November 2009. At that time it gets flung out towards Comet 67P it what I can only describe as a brilliant toss. I am truly in awe of our ability to make stuff like this happen. I will now blame you for my failure to get in-world because I've gone cam-crazy out in the Solar System. ;-). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Coby Foden wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: I still hold strongly to my view that the whole mission was money badly spent, simply because, I adopted that view about this project when it was thought that the whole thing would accomplish all that was intended. I found some interesting piece of information about the Rosetta mission and dogs. :smileyhappy: • The total cost of the Rosetta mission during its 21 years lifespan is: €1.40 billion ($1.74 billion) According to: http://www.americanpetproducts.org/press_industrytrends.asp • In the USA for dog toys (yes, dog toys) the money spent yearly is: €1.87 billion ($2.32 billion) :smileysurprised: So, ESA was able to make this very exciting space mission with less money than what is spent on dog toys in the USA, in one year. Looking in this perspective the mission was not expensive at all. And where exactly is this Rosetta now? Interesting solar system animation showing planets and their trajectories up to Jupiter. Rosetta and the comet with their trajectories are included too. http://sci.esa.int/where_is_rosetta/ (There have been some tweets that "scientists are confident that Philea will wake up from hibernation when the comet gets closer to the sun" [somewhere in the spring 2015].) It's still money badly spent, imo, when that same money could have done much good that is necessary for people. It's only one of the many things that greatly needed money is wasted on, of course. I watched an hour long programme about the mission a couple of nights ago. What they've done is truly awesome (even though it went s little awry at the end). There's no denying that. It doesn't mean it was money well spent though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coby Foden Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 Phil Deakins wrote: I watched an hour long programme about the mission a couple of nights ago. What they've done is truly awesome (even though it went s little awry at the end). There's no denying that. It doesn't mean it was money well spent though. Maybe UK should follow the example of US politics? I feel sad for NASA that it has been crippled by the recent budget cuts. Many planned interesting space projects have been discontinued. :smileysad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheriColette Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 haha...good cartoon Coby. And yes, we could go on for ages lamenting the cost of this and other space exploration and never agree. This week Australia spent $450 + million on G20, hosting (wining and dinning) leaders from around the world to talk about our future. (Why could they not just do a tele-conference?) Meanwhile they cut education and health care funds and also up in smoke, thousands of dollars each bomb for Iraq....I dont know where that money came from....more debt I guess! At least I get to enjoy the discoveries Rosetta is making. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madelaine McMasters Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 CheriColette wrote: haha...good cartoon Coby. And yes, we could go on for ages lamenting the cost of this and other space exploration and never agree. This week Australia spent $450 + million on G20, hosting (wining and dinning) leaders from around the world to talk about our future. (Why could they not just do a tele-conference?) Meanwhile they cut education and health care funds and also up in smoke, thousands of dollars each bomb for Iraq....I dont know where that money came from....more debt I guess! At least I get to enjoy the discoveries Rosetta is making. Just as we could go on lamenting the costs of vacations. Why do people take them? Why do employers pay for them? Wouldn't it make more sense to just keep working until we drop? While we may need only the bare necessities to survive, we need more than that to thrive. We're curious creatures. If we start selecting for those who are not curious, we're doomed. This is the fault I find in the thinking of those who believe we should not reach for the stars until every problem of basic necessity is solved. We cannot neglect our larger aspirations. What's the value of the joy you received from seeing Rosetta's discoveries? Is it worth the price of a movie ticket? If it is, then maybe you'll see one less movie this year? And why do we waste money making movies, or music? I recently walked out of a Richard Thompson concert because the band was playing so damned loud I feared further injury to my ears (I have tinnitus from attending a Civil Wars concert a few years ago). My ticket to the RT concert cost $55. That's (if I remember correctly) more than 10x the amortized cost of Rosetta for EU residents. Had Rosetta been a US expenditure, I'd have applauded it for giving me far more pleasure per dollar than Richard Thompson. Come visit me someday and I'll show you my own little bit of outer space. It's not as pretty since LL changed the way the SL wind works, but I think you'll enjoy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikka Luik Posted November 20, 2014 Author Share Posted November 20, 2014 Odd really. Only posted to say yay Science as it cheered me up. If I have to justify it costing me lets see.. a pack of smokes a week for ten years then I still say yay Science and yay Future and.. and ... but hey it was just me i suppose. Sorry my meagre EU individual contribution is seen as a waste of funds that could have been better spent. Next time I will buy a lotto ticket eh? And finance my own astonishing ... whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 Madelaine McMasters wrote: Just as we could go on lamenting the costs of vacations. Why do people take them? Why do employers pay for them? Wouldn't it make more sense to just keep working until we drop? While we may need only the bare necessities to survive, we need more than that to thrive. It's nothing to do with individual spending, Maddy. Each country has just one pot of money, which is supplied from taxes of various sorts. That's where individual financial involvement ends. What a country does with its pot of money is what matters. That's what I've been talking about. In my country, hospitals and medical services are closing through lack of money, youth centres are being closed down through lack of money, critically ill patients have to go abroad for treatment through lack of money to buy the equipment, etc. etc. etc. Money for this project, awesome though the feat is, is taken from our one pot of money, which necessarily means that there is less left in the pot to fund some of the things that are so badly needed. Apart from that, this country is a long way over a trillion pounds sterling in debt. I forget the exact figure - probably about 2 trillion US$. We are deeply in the red and the very opposite of being a rich country, as someone said earlier. We simply can't afford to spend lots of sorely needed money needlessly - on this project, for instance. Why do we do it? Because Britain used to be the major player in the world, and idiotic politicians consistently try to make believe that we are still a major player. In a way we are, but only because we borrow our way into playing, getting deeper and deeper in debt in the process. After the war (WWII), we were deep in debt because we had to pay for the military equipment that we bought on credit from the U.S.. For many years the news annouced the current 'balance of payments', as the debt was called. The debt was slowly being paid off. Somewhere along the line that all changed, as some politicians decided that mega debt was ok, so we started to increase it. I don't know who started it, but all parties subscribe to it. I think the whole world subscribes to it now. I don't know why it changed here, but I suspect it's because our politicians saw that Britain's standing in the world was shrinking, and pretending to still be a big player was the thing to do, so they pretended we were big by being able to afford everything, and that was (and still is) only possible by borrowing big. Imagine how bad it would be if families worked their finances that way. It's no different with countries. We're curious creatures. If we start selecting for those who are not curious, we're doomed. This is the fault I find in the thinking of those who believe we should not reach for the stars until every problem of basic necessity is solved. We cannot neglect our larger aspirations. I'm not aware of anyone in this thread suggesting not reaching for the stars. If you had me in mind when you wrote that paragraph, then you haven't read the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drongle McMahon Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 Imagine how bad it would be if families worked their finances that way. Uh!? Considering the following, they do... www.citizensadvice.org.uk/pdf_the_value_of_debt_advice.pdf (a couple of years ago already) Total personal debt in the UK currently stands at £1.46 trillion. The average household debt in the UK is £7,975 (excluding mortgages). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_national_debt As of Q1 2013 UK government debt amounted to £1,377 billion, or 88.1% of total GDP, at which time the annual cost of servicing (paying the interest) the public debt amounted to around £43bn, or roughly 3% of GDP. So the household debt, excluding mortgages, is bigger than (let's say a similar amount to) the National debt. Also, the cost of the whole of Rosetta, over 20 years, is less than 2.5% of the National debt interest payment each year of the UK alone. Your insistence on pursuing this particular optional expenditure as wasteful is not unreasonable, but it does seem to betray a biased sense of proportion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coby Foden Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 Phil Deakins wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Just as we could go on lamenting the costs of vacations. Why do people take them? Why do employers pay for them? Wouldn't it make more sense to just keep working until we drop? While we may need only the bare necessities to survive, we need more than that to thrive. It's nothing to do with individual spending, Maddy. Each country has just one pot of money, which is supplied from taxes of various sorts. That's where individual financial involvement ends. Things are changing. There are now independent companies geared towards space exploration. And just recently a new opportunity for anybody to participate financially, individually, to a space project has opened. All space exploration is not any more totally dependent on the decisions made by governments. Which is great. Now everyone has a chance to participate individually, financially, to a very exiting moon mission. LUNAR MISSION ONE: A new lunar mission for everyone "Lunar Mission One is the most inspirational lunar project since the Apollo landings and your chance to reserve your place in space. We plan to send an unmanned robotic landing module to the South Pole of the Moon – an area unexplored by previous missions. We’re going to use pioneering technology to drill down to a depth of at least 20m – 10 times deeper than has ever been drilled before – and potentially as deep as 100m." Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LunarMissionOne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 Drongle McMahon wrote: Imagine how bad it would be if families worked their finances that way. Uh!? Considering the following, they do... www.citizensadvice.org.uk/pdf_the_value_of_debt_advice.pdf (a couple of years ago already) Total personal debt in the UK currently stands at £1.46 trillion. The average household debt in the UK is £7,975 (excluding mortgages). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_national_debt As of Q1 2013 UK government debt amounted to £1,377 billion, or 88.1% of total GDP, at which time the annual cost of servicing (paying the interest) the public debt amounted to around £43bn, or roughly 3% of GDP. So the household debt, excluding mortgages, is bigger than (let's say a similar amount to) the National debt. Also, the cost of the whole of Rosetta, over 20 years, is less than 2.5% of the National debt interest payment each year of the UK alone. Your insistence on pursuing this particular optional expenditure as wasteful is not unreasonable, but it does seem to betray a biased sense of proportion. No doubt the personal debt figures for the UK are as you posted, but it's not the way that most families run. It doesn't matter what percentage of what the Rosetta mission cost the UK. What matters is that it was spent to gain information about origins, and that isn't going to make any difference to anyone except that some people will find it interesting, whereas that money could have been used to buy essential medical equipment, for instance, or keep a few hospitals from closing, etc. etc. etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now