e-Claire

Beaten by Euroweenies ! !

So I'm hunting around for this nice little fiber optic sponge story and what do mine eyes behold?!?! Picture Bill the Cat -- got it?

"aaakk"

A revolutionary new type of solar powered engine will be at the centre of Europe's first ever mission to the Moon, project leaders have announced [ion engine] Humans could be living on the Moon within 20 years, says a leading [Euro-weenie] lunar scientist.

NASA: you insular, hidebound, drugstore-explorers!!! Congress: you indolent, grifting wastrels!!! We [US] had a lock on this and you shortsighted fucktards ninies blew it ! Allow me to explain the source of my dismay, nay, alarm. Slowly and with words of one syllable or less: Gravity makes things fall toward the center of the Earth. [with me so far? don't hesitate to ask questions...] Whoever is standing at the top of the hill can throw rocks down onto whoever is standing at the bottom of the hill. [this was grasped at the beginning of time and exemplified in the castles of the middle ages. This is not rocket science.] This is the tough part, so pay attention: The Moon is the top of a very large hill. There are lots and lots of free rocks on the Moon. With just a little bit o' math, those rocks can be made to fall on a particular place. Like, say, THE PENTAGON. Or, NEW YORK CITY. Ring any bells, kids? This concludes your physics and history lessons for the day.

1. I would say the satellites, shuttles and space station(s) around our own earth are much more potent “hills” for throwing rocks than anything on the moon… For one thing, the moon also has the said gravity, which could make rock-throwing an exercise in “tof-e sarbala” (Upward vertical spit - or in English-speak, pissing against the wind).

   On another note, I’ve noticed (though maybe it’s been here before?) an upsurge in “snark” on your blog as well. Coincidence? or is it yet another sign of the ever-so-fundamental influence of peers on peers in the blogosphere?

   Posted by Alireza  on  08/20/03  at  04:53 PM

2. So - “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress” may actually happen, in our lifetimes no less? 

   Posted by  on  08/20/03  at  10:25 PM

3. Now I’ve heard everything!

   Posted by Shae  on  08/21/03  at  02:48 AM

4. >>the satellites, shuttles and space station(s) around our own earth are much more potent “hills” for throwing rocks…

   
   Sure, they’re closer.  It would be easier; ‘cept there are no rocks to throw in LEO.  Anything brought up is prohibitively expensive and going out to get anything else is also very, very expensive.

   Still, point valid.  It is possible.

   As to the increase in the snark factor—it sure helps with the August ennui, don’t it?  ; >

   Posted by Claire  on  08/21/03  at  07:48 AM

5. I’m with Claire.  Mass takes energy to move.  Anything in orbit needs to come there from Earth or the Moon (or the Asteroid belt...WAY to much energy needed).  Which takes less energy?  Why, the moon.  So why aren’t we already using kinetic energy bombs instead of ballistic missiles...? Because we have no base on the moon.
   Chilling, Claire. I have to say I didn’t even think of that when I read the news report.  I don’t like how your mind works, but I do like how your mind works, if you know what I mean.

   Posted by nathan  on  08/21/03  at  10:21 AM

6. Claire,

   I think you owe NASA an apology on at least part of this one.  NASA built ion thrusters many years ago, and flew the first one on Deep Space One years before ESA’s Smart One.  ESA just doesn’t like to mention precedence when describing their missions.  Go read my post on SMART-1 at
   http://www.aoe.vt.edu/~cdhall/Space/archives/2003_09.html#000343

   (If the link doesn’t work in the comment, just go to my blog and search on “smart-1”, which i’ve blogged on several times)

   Now as for why we’re not “out there” yet, well, that’s partly NASA, partly politicians, and definitely debatable as to which is the most to blame. 

   and that’s all folks,
   chris

   Posted by chris hall  on  10/12/03  at  07:12 AM

7. Chris,

   I don’t think so . . . 

   Technically, you are correct:  NASA did start testing ion drives in the late ‘50s.  NASA flew an ion drive on DS-1 [only thanx to Goldin forcing the issue.] [hence “hidebound"]

   And given that, I think my invectives toward NASA are right on the mark.  Do you see *them* making announcements like the Euroweenies or, now, the goddam Communist Chinese, fa gah’sake, that *we* will be on the Moon within a decade or two?!?!?!?!?  No way!  They’d rather stay here and dick around testing successively better and trickier ion engines than actually use the ones that work *now* to *do something.* [hence “insular"]

   We *know* we can do it—we did it.  And the Chinese are using our tech to do it themselves!!  Why, oh why can’t we get off our butts?  Isn’t that the purpose of a “National Space Admin—to go into Space????!!??? [hence “indolent” and “drug-store explorers"]

   NASA is clearly not pushing to do anything of the sort; hence my well-chosen invectives to their short-sightedness.  ["fucktards" was simply gratuitous]

   NB I intend my comments to apply in no way shape or form to those members of NASA who *do* work toward actual space exploration and habitation—voices in the wilderness that they are . . .

   Posted by Claire  on  10/20/03  at  10:26 AM

<< Back to main