View Full Version : NASA finds water vapor on Saturn moon
Major Robert Dump
03-10-2006, 02:33
http://cfnews13.com/StoryHeadline.aspx?id=13890
So will the forthcoming civilization refer to its original proprietors as "the forefathers" who decided to escape all the douchbags by riding ships to a new land to start afresh? And will the civilation turn out be full of douchebags too?
Better hope the China doesn't get there first.
Papewaio
03-10-2006, 02:37
Well I can't remember when the last astronaut got significantly further then the International Space Station...
So the Chinese with the ever increacing manufacturing capacity in volume and sophisitication have a far larger chance going forward then anyone else of colonising anything beyond the moon...
master of the puppets
03-10-2006, 03:01
cool, water on saturn, it will be great to learn that mers had water and venus has life in its deep sea vents.
Well I can't remember when the last astronaut got significantly further then the International Space Station...
So the Chinese with the ever increacing manufacturing capacity in volume and sophisitication have a far larger chance going forward then anyone else of colonising anything beyond the moon...
It has to do with will.
We can get to Mars right this moment, the technology is there. The will and money just aren't. China on the other hand I doubt can do it just yet. And going to Saturn? We are talking at least 20 years in all, and only special times (our position related to that of Saturn, related to the percieved positions of the returntrip).
Saturn is outside out reach for now.
Zalmoxis
03-10-2006, 03:52
Well, technology does double in performance in relatively short intervals these days...
Thanks for the information. Excellent discovery.
Well, technology does double in performance in relatively short intervals these days...
That doesn't apply to our biggest problem -- we're still using the same tech for lifting objects out of Earth's gravity well that was developed for the V2 rocket.
My prediction: Once we hit on a better way to get up and out of the gravity well, things will get really interesting really fast. Right now we're stuck with refined versions of 1940s technology.
The more water we find, the better. For all of the obvious reasons.
Alexander the Pretty Good
03-10-2006, 05:04
The more water we find, the better. For all of the obvious reasons.
Saturn Springs: what it means to be from Maine.
Yeah, a space elevator would be nice, although there are some physicists who believe (for good reasons) that even if we can overcome the materials problems, such a design will never be practical. Frankly, I don't care what the mechanism is, I just want us to find a better way to get stuff up and out. Until that happens we aren't even at the rowing-dugout-canoes-into-the-Atlantic phase of space exploration/exploitation.
This is a place where a lemur's politics diverge way far away from the mainsrteam. If I were President, I'd be sinking all of that pork money into developing ways to beat the gravity well. Well, that and green energy. I can't begin to comprehend why we haven't gone after that like a Congressman going after a bribe. Green energy is going to be a huge, huge market, and there's no reason the U.S.A. shouldn't have the same sort of dominance and leadership in that field that we've had in computers and aviation. Screw the tree-huggers, it's all about the next 100+ years of technological/economic dominance.
And here I'm letting my jingo show. I believe that America is the least worst superpower the world could have, certainly better than China, and much better than the E.U. (assuming they could ever get their act together and become a superpower -- a debatable premise). So I wish we were thinking more long-term, and building up our expertise and manufacturing capability in the newest and most promising markets. And anybody who doesn't think green energy is going to be huge has been sniffing too much drain solvent.
Sorry. Getting a bit offtopic there.
Well I can't remember when the last astronaut got significantly further then the International Space Station...
Please don't mention the I.S.S. in polite company. I hate that thing with an un-Lemurlike passion. What a white elephant. What a waste. What a collossal distraction. Why in God's name are we spending so much money on a low-orbit piece of well-insulated trailer park that does nothing?
I need a new emotion -- prosimian ripping his hair out.
Sasaki Kojiro
03-10-2006, 05:24
This is a place where a lemur's politics diverge way far away from the mainsrteam. If I were President, I'd be sinking all of that pork money into developing ways to beat the gravity well. Well, that and green energy.
Yup. With Helium-3 and possibly solar power those 2 could go hand in hand. Unfortunatly NASA has no interest in the moon except as a stepping stone to Mars. Maybe if fusion starts coming along the US will take more interest in a moon base.
Zalmoxis
03-10-2006, 06:10
Is it possible to build a railgun in space to shoot off whatever we want where we want?
discovery1
03-10-2006, 10:10
Please don't mention the I.S.S. in polite company. I hate that thing with an un-Lemurlike passion. What a white elephant. What a waste. What a collossal distraction. Why in God's name are we spending so much money on a low-orbit piece of well-insulated trailer park that does nothing?
I need a new emotion -- prosimian ripping his hair out.
HERE HERE!!!!
Is it possible to build a railgun in space to shoot off whatever we want where we want?
Yes, takes a lot of room though.
I don't think the problem is the tech. It's just hte way it is set up it could be MUCH cheaper. Every rocket is build by hand. There are no rocket assembly lines. What is really needed is a cheap, reasonably reliable booster to haul stuff into space, not ppl though. They go on something built only for ppl, not something like the Space Shuttle.
cool, water on saturn, it will be great to learn that mers had water and venus has life in its deep sea vents.
Venus is Hell. There is no liquid water.
HAIL SCALED COMPOSITES! HAIL THE X-PRIZE!
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/060309_cassini_water.html
English assassin
03-10-2006, 10:25
Once Space becomes open to the world it will be an entirely new form of colonialism. And we need to be at the top of the heap
Oh god, new frontier, same old human race...
(And yes I know that is a bit rich coming from an inhabitant of the embers of the greatest empire the world has ever seen (tm)...)
I agree, English assassin.
Maybe we should get peace on earth before we start wars on other planets.
All you Spacecowboys just want to defend your place on Mars and become rich landowners, letting Martians work for you as slaves...:inquisitive:
Now, I really wonder what kind of propulsion should be better than rockets or use less energy than rockets? In the end you have to get the weight all the way up against gravitation anyway.
Plus i wouldn´t like to come to a planet/moon and need to live there somewhere without fresh air, in a small colony building, where people go crazy because of the circumstances.
Just because there is water doesn´t mean it´s the holy land where cowboys can enjoy their freedom and ride their horses everywhere....:dizzy2:
English assassin
03-10-2006, 13:20
Now, I really wonder what kind of propulsion should be better than rockets or use less energy than rockets? In the end you have to get the weight all the way up against gravitation anyway.
This is an interesting Qu. as I understand it chemical rockets are really not very efficient for getting out of the earth's gravity well. Even I managed to understand that by carrying all their oxidant with them, they are carrying and therefore accelerating more mass than is strictly necessary, so one of those clever hypersonic jet things they have been testing would be better (so long as there is enough O2 in the atmosphere anyway).
Also I gather you need much less energy overall if you have something to "hold on to" as you go up, rather than going hell for leather for escape velocity quite low down (eg an elevator, or I suppose maybe something lighter than air? )
This was interesting though its not mainly to do with leaving the earth:
http://www.firstscience.com/site/articles/power.asp
Maybe we should get peace on earth before we start wars on other planets.
Terrible idea. Human beings do not fix things while they sit around. The greatest advances of freedom and liberty have coincided with exploration. Don't ask me why, 'cause I don't have a solid answer, but when sweaty men go off to conquer alien lands, things brighten up at home. The whole "Let's get our heads down and fix everything here before we get off the planetary couch" argument is backed up by zero historical evidence. Doesn't work.
Just because there is water doesn´t mean it´s the holy land where cowboys can enjoy their freedom and ride their horses everywhere....
Sure it does! With water you can easily get oxygen and hydrogen (that whole H20 thing), two of the most necessary materials in space. Not to mention with water you can get, um, water, which is really important when you're in a hostile environment. So water does, in fact, mean that we can enjoy our freedom and ride our horses everywhere.
Please don't mention the I.S.S. in polite company. I hate that thing with an un-Lemurlike passion. What a white elephant. What a waste. What a collossal distraction. Why in God's name are we spending so much money on a low-orbit piece of well-insulated trailer park that does nothing?
I need a new emotion -- prosimian ripping his hair out.
It does do something. In fact, it`s quite useful because it allows "us" to do research in a no-gravity enviroment.
Orginally posted by Lemur
we're still using the same tech for lifting objects out of Earth's gravity well that was developed for the V2 rocket.
You would be completely wrong there Lemur, we are you using Ion Rockets as propulsion for deeper space exploration.
Originally posted by Husar
Now, I really wonder what kind of propulsion should be better than rockets or use less energy than rockets? In the end you have to get the weight all the way up against gravitation anyway.
Ion rockets use 1/10 the energy of a normal solid or liquid fuel rockets, and are much faster. They were first used on deep space1 in 1998 and since then have been improved. The deep space exploration vehicle that NASA launched a couple months back, used the next generation of the Ion Rockets. there's only one problem with them, they require huge sums of electricity to run, which doesnt become a problem till your near jupiter. The one NASA launched a few months back required 4 megawatts to run, which was why they had a nuclear reactor on it, the solar panels couldnt produce enough energy past jupiter.
Personally I would have liked to see solar sails used, but the damn rocket blew up before reaching space, grrrr they had to use a russian rocket :wall: :wall: .
You would be completely wrong there Lemur, we are you using Ion Rockets as propulsion for deeper space exploration.
I don't think I'm wrong; it's more that I'm talking about a different issue. My whole discussion has been about getting things out of the gravity well. You're talking about the tech used once objects are already in space. Hey, once an object is in free-fall, all sorts of options open up. But you can't use a solar sail for liftoff.
[edit]
Oh, and Husar was also talking about the same thing.
Stop de space race that’s old!
If we don't start learning working together we'll never be able to beat and enslave those aliens.
Sure it does! With water you can easily get oxygen and hydrogen (that whole H20 thing), two of the most necessary materials in space. Not to mention with water you can get, um, water, which is really important when you're in a hostile environment. So water does, in fact, mean that we can enjoy our freedom and ride our horses everywhere.
We’ll I’ll put you in an airless compartment fore a couple of days (water included).
And when I come back I want to see you riding you’re horse and wielding that lasso like a true cowboy.
Very interesting stuff though.
Personally I would have liked to see solar sails used, but the damn rocket blew up before reaching space, grrrr they had to use a russian rocket :wall: :wall: .
lol, yes solar sails do look a good solution for non-people exploring far distances. But I don't see any future for it to be used for short distance intra-solarsystem exploration. Or any human transport really.
The problem with space traveling is that they always use, or chemistry or fysics. They should combine them more. And instead of using one way of gaining speed combine them.
Ofcourse the ultimate solution would be wormholes. But that's just plain fantasy. It has never been proven! Traveling trough a black hole, yeah right! how in gods name would you be preventing you ship to be torn apart? I mean they're so powerfull they even mess around with time.
And yeah, the space elevator. It doesn't seems the perfect way of space traval but rather the perfect thing for terrorists to blow up!
The Black Ship
03-11-2006, 17:06
http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_awst_story.jsp?id=news/030606p1.xml
Getting out of Earth is by far more difficult than you would think. If you could get payload costs down to $100 a pound (showing my anti-metric inclinations) you'd be a genious.
discovery1
03-12-2006, 00:03
And yeah, the space elevator. It doesn't seems the perfect way of space traval but rather the perfect thing for terrorists to blow up!
You are aware that a space elevator would be situated out in the middle of the ocean yes? While it would be within a certain area, it's exact location would change day by day. So no, not an easy target at all.
.
lol, yes solar sails do look a good solution for non-people exploring far distances. But I don't see any future for it to be used for short distance intra-solarsystem exploration. Or any human transport really.
Short and intra-solarsytem? No. The solar system is HUGE. And solar sails are just as practical for human transport as ion engines.
It does do something. In fact, it`s quite useful because it allows "us" to do research in a no-gravity enviroment.
And all but one kind of research can be done more cheaply with out ppl. The exception is of course human reactions to micro-gravity.
Although if you want to get into space cheaply, then build a big dumb booster. Simple and big. Make it out of steel instead of fancy composites, and make it REALLY big. Everybody loves Sea Dragons..... (http://astronautix.com/lvs/searagon.htm). Just keep costs down using cheap materials, forget all this stuff about rockets being efficient.
More on the Big Dumb Booster guy, Truax says the payload of that Sea Dragon would be 20 bucks a lb in 1983 (http://neverworld.net/truax/) assuming a 3 percent inflation rate that's 36.12 bucks now.
Short and intra-solarsytem? No. The solar system is HUGE. And solar sails are just as practical for human transport as ion engines.
yeah ofcourse the solar system is large but I'm talking in astronomic distances ~;)
I don't know if solar systems and ion engines are so good for human space transport. both need time to get going.
And that elevator not being an easy target? first of even if it moves terrorists aren't dumb you know. They'll figger out where it is. And if they destroy this I don't want to know what the consequences are. Let's hope that counterweight would never touch the earth.
discovery1
03-13-2006, 01:41
And how pray tell would they get close to it w/o being noticed? It's not like anyone could just walk on. The counter weight never would, and it would be extremely difficult to destroy the base. For a good idea what it would be like, look at an off shore oil well.
Ion engines(unless they use really big ones) and solar sails(again, unless they are huge) make for pretty bad transporters of people. it would take a month to change orbits around Earth, never mind get anywhere.
And all but one kind of research can be done more cheaply with out ppl.
I want to see your robots plant seeds and study the plants, I want them to repair the space station; and so on.
Humans can get a lot done though. The two landers on Mars at the moment have accomplished a lot, but a couple of humans could have done more in a day.
discovery1
03-13-2006, 23:34
I want to see your robots plant seeds and study the plants
Have a robot go around dropping little bits of lichen around Mars' polar cap. This is by FAR the easiest one. And much better suited, since it would take hundreds if not thousands of years.
To study the planets, look at what has been done so far. Viking, Voyeger, Megellen, Gallieo, Cassini. While humans can, at least for now, do much better than bots, the arguement goes away when its orbital surveys or flybys.
I want them to repair the space station
If the spce progam relied on robots, then there would be no space station, certainly not the horrific flying white elephant that is up there now.
Papewaio
03-14-2006, 00:07
Humans can get a lot done though. The two landers on Mars at the moment have accomplished a lot, but a couple of humans could have done more in a day.
But... which is going to cost more per unit of information gathered?
And which one can stop working and nobody worry too much about it?
Ion engines(unless they use really big ones) and solar sails(again, unless they are huge) make for pretty bad transporters of people. it would take a month to change orbits around Earth, never mind get anywhere.
Well that was my point...:dizzy2:
but about the elevator, do they have to destroy the base if they can destroy the cable? Tough I don't know if the counter weigth would ever get to the earth. (depens about the distance and other stuff). I don't know if it is a perfect target for terrorists I just hope they take terrorist intpo acount while designing it. Tough the question remains if they'll ever build it.
Btw: talking about space, is it true that scientists in Zwitserland are trying to create a black hole. Isn't tat dangerous? I mean those thing block sunlight, with the small mass of photons and moving with the speed of light that means, that a blackhole is quite powefull no? But if they really would want to create one what security measurements will they take. I wouldn't like seeing our planet being sucked up by a black hole.
discovery1
03-14-2006, 21:18
Well that was my point...:dizzy2:
but about the elevator, do they have to destroy the base if they can destroy the cable? Tough I don't know if the counter weigth would ever get to the earth. (depens about the distance and other stuff). I don't know if it is a perfect target for terrorists I just hope they take terrorist intpo acount while designing it. Tough the question remains if they'll ever build it.
Btw: talking about space, is it true that scientists in Zwitserland are trying to create a black hole. Isn't tat dangerous? I mean those thing block sunlight, with the small mass of photons and moving with the speed of light that means, that a blackhole is quite powefull no? But if they really would want to create one what security measurements will they take. I wouldn't like seeing our planet being sucked up by a black hole.
If you are swinging an object around your head and you let go, will it hit you?
As for destorying the cable, unless they sneak a bomb in(which is alot like saying what if they sneak a bomb onto a plane). The only way to do this as far as I can tell would involve using stuff terrorists don't have(armed balistic missile subs). And even then, it is VERY iffy. Alot of luck would be involved in hitting it. The controlers might even have enough time for evasive manuvers(wave around the cable).
A black hole? I know of no such thing. Although in the fantasicaly unlikely event that what you say is true, and they actually pull it off, there probably isn't anything to worry about. Even though the density is much much more, the Earth would be by FAR more massive.
So there is such a thing (http://www.spacedaily.com/news/blackhole-01b.html) but don't worry they dissappear after 10^-15 seconds
If you are swinging an object around your head and you let go, will it hit you?
As for destorying the cable, unless they sneak a bomb in(which is alot like saying what if they sneak a bomb onto a plane). The only way to do this as far as I can tell would involve using stuff terrorists don't have(armed balistic missile subs). And even then, it is VERY iffy. Alot of luck would be involved in hitting it. The controlers might even have enough time for evasive manuvers(wave around the cable).
A black hole? I know of no such thing. Although in the fantasicaly unlikely event that what you say is true, and they actually pull it off, there probably isn't anything to worry about. Even though the density is much much more, the Earth would be by FAR more massive.
So there is such a thing (http://www.spacedaily.com/news/blackhole-01b.html) but don't worry they dissappear after 10^-15 seconds
oh well if this won't kill us all the radioactive stuff in the sea will. ~;)
...Or the elevator :laugh4: ~;)
hmmm didn't seem to be a real blackhole blackhole. well not a space kind of blackhole.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.