![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
So they can get material from pint-sized asteroids (second mission is
planned) but we've yet to send and get back a probe to Mars. Why? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 3 Jan 2013 19:13:17 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote: So they can get material from pint-sized asteroids (second mission is planned) but we've yet to send and get back a probe to Mars. Why? Because the gravity of Mars is much higher and therefore a sample return from Mars requires much more fuel. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 4, 1:42*am, Paul Schlyter wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jan 2013 19:13:17 -0800 (PST), RichA wrote: So they can get material from pint-sized asteroids (second mission is planned) but we've yet to send and get back a probe to Mars. *Why? Because the gravity of Mars is much higher and therefore a sample return from Mars requires much more fuel. It isn't so much that an actual launch from Mars would be so difficult (1/3 Earth gravity,) but rather that landing the launch equipment and fuel could be problematic and expensive. Funding would have to compete with the pork found in the Hurricane Sandy relief bill. However, given the Congress's spending habits, maybe not. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 4, 5:44*am, wrote:
On Jan 4, 1:42*am, Paul Schlyter wrote: On Thu, 3 Jan 2013 19:13:17 -0800 (PST), RichA wrote: So they can get material from pint-sized asteroids (second mission is planned) but we've yet to send and get back a probe to Mars. *Why? Because the gravity of Mars is much higher and therefore a sample return from Mars requires much more fuel. It isn't so much that an actual launch from Mars would be so difficult (1/3 Earth gravity,) but rather that landing the launch equipment and fuel could be problematic and expensive. Funding would have to compete with the pork found in the Hurricane Sandy relief bill. However, given the Congress's spending habits, maybe not. The Sandy damage claim level is pure fraud and should be dispensed with. I challenge anybody to innumerate on the $60 billion damages claimed. Meanwhile, I hope recent Mars probes "on-board labs" do a better job at finding conclusive results than previous ones. Remember Viking's search for life? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 4, 9:34*pm, RichA wrote:
On Jan 4, 5:44*am, wrote: On Jan 4, 1:42*am, Paul Schlyter wrote: On Thu, 3 Jan 2013 19:13:17 -0800 (PST), RichA wrote: So they can get material from pint-sized asteroids (second mission is planned) but we've yet to send and get back a probe to Mars. *Why? Because the gravity of Mars is much higher and therefore a sample return from Mars requires much more fuel. It isn't so much that an actual launch from Mars would be so difficult (1/3 Earth gravity,) but rather that landing the launch equipment and fuel could be problematic and expensive. Funding would have to compete with the pork found in the Hurricane Sandy relief bill. However, given the Congress's spending habits, maybe not. The Sandy damage claim level is pure fraud and should be dispensed with. *I challenge anybody to innumerate on the $60 billion damages claimed. Insurance should cover much of the loss of private property, except that National Flood Insurance Program doesn't seem to have enough for the payouts. IOW, the federal government didn't collect enough in premiums to cover losses. The taxpayers, most of whom do NOT live in flood zones, do NOT live near the beach and who pay for all of their own insurance, get to bail out the victims. It goes without saying that those who had NO flood insurance of any kind should eat the loss. Federal LOANS to state and local governments -might- be appropriate for repair of critical infrastructure (but not to rebuild parks, etc.) The relief bill includes millions in pork for Amtrak, Alaskan fisheries, Smithsonian roof repair, HUD CDBGs ($17B), new cars for DHS, etc. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
RichA:
So they can get material from pint-sized asteroids (second mission is planned) but we've yet to send and get back a probe to Mars. Why? Paul Schlyter: Because the gravity of Mars is much higher and therefore a sample return from Mars requires much more fuel. IMO, neither mission makes sense. You can buy a piece of an asteroid on Astromart for $100. A piece of Mars costs a bit more, but we have them. The latest figures I recall showed that there are 100 pieces of Mars in scientists' hands, with more waiting to be discovered. $ Billions saved! Cancel the manned Disney-science missions and launch more robots. Mankind has no future on Mars, and realistically, except possibly as seed fragments of DNA, he doesn't have a future on the other side of the Milky Way or in M31. Launch more space telescopes, build more powerful accelerators to determine whether there are fundamental truths and to learn them if they exist. -- I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that you will say in your entire life. usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 09:20:30 -0500, Davoud wrote:
RichA: So they can get material from pint-sized asteroids (second mission is planned) but we've yet to send and get back a probe to Mars. Why? Paul Schlyter: Because the gravity of Mars is much higher and therefore a sample return from Mars requires much more fuel. IMO, neither mission makes sense. You can buy a piece of an asteroid on Astromart for $100. A piece of Mars costs a bit more, but we have them. Nobody knows from where on Mars these pieces came. On pieces obtained from a sample return mission, one would know that |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 17:54:52 +0100, Paul Schlyter
wrote: Nobody knows from where on Mars these pieces came. On pieces obtained from a sample return mission, one would know that Also, meteorites have been altered by the time spent in space, by their passage through the atmosphere, and by weathering on Earth's surface. They're tremendously valuable for science, but are no substitute for pristine samples from their parent bodies. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 4, 11:54*am, Paul Schlyter wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 09:20:30 -0500, Davoud wrote: RichA: So they can get material from pint-sized asteroids (second mission is planned) but we've yet to send and get back a probe to Mars. *Why? Paul Schlyter: Because the gravity of Mars is much higher and therefore a sample return from Mars requires much more fuel. IMO, neither mission makes sense. You can buy a piece of an asteroid on Astromart for $100. A piece of Mars costs a bit more, but we have them. Nobody knows from where on Mars these pieces came. On pieces obtained from a sample return mission, one would know that No one could ever accuse Davoid of committing a thought crime, nor could those at his local school system, since neither he nor they seem to be capable of thought in the first place. However, six year olds apparently can be so accused: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...efc_story.html |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Sampling Earth Soil, scienceNow and Mars Phoenix | W. eWatson | Amateur Astronomy | 4 | August 7th 08 09:05 PM |
Rumblings at mission control: NASA Reviews Canceled Asteroid Mission | Raving Loonie | Misc | 0 | March 17th 06 05:15 AM |
Hayabusa is sure to have succeeded in asteroid sampling! (Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | Astronomy Misc | 0 | November 27th 05 06:51 PM |
Hayabusa is sure to have succeeded in asteroid sampling! (Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | News | 0 | November 27th 05 06:23 PM |
Sampling Mars Surface??? | G=EMC^2 Glazier | Misc | 42 | October 4th 03 09:19 PM |