[Q&A+] Outdated Tech in Space, Control Over the Moon, Optimism for China's Space Program | Q&A 371
Was James Webb already outdated by the time it launched? Who will control the Moon when we get the lunar bases? Why am I optimistic about China's space program? And in Q&A+, if Earth had rings, what would be the best place to observe them?
Watch the video here (with no ads) or on YouTube: https://youtu.be/wWFkdPF4JBQ
Comments (6)
10:20 The tendency of people to prematurely form opinions, and to form opinions with inadequate expertise and information, wouldn't be as bad if they were open to reevaluation of those opinions when new evidence came along. The bigger problem is the tendency of people to stubbornly cling to their opinions regardless of the evidence. "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself—and you are the easiest person to fool." - Richard Feynman Changing an established opinion is uncomfortable. People don't like doing it. It requires discipline to seek the truth even when you might not like it. "Mental health is an ongoing process of dedication to reality at all costs." - M. Scott Peck, "The Road Less Traveled" The tendency of people to flatly reject any and all evidence that they encounter which is inconsistent with their established opinions is one of the main reasons that propaganda is so effective. It's also one of the reasons we've have grievance studies, climate alarmism, and oral phenylephrine. "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry on as if nothing happened." - Winston Churchill (paraphrased)
The truth is out there but, as the world heads more to the right in its' governance, the truth will be harder to find and, in the end, it may disappear altogether, replaced by dogma and propaganda. Hitler had the books burnt, Mao caused a cultural 'rebirth', Pol Pot killed the intellectuals, creating new 'truths'. Fraser reports scientific truth as we currently understand science. When science changes, as it does from time to time, he will report on it, without bias. Personally, I think he is without peer as a science communicator.
Hey, just a thought…. If we blew up all the Starlink satellites in orbit.. would it create a pretty disk formation (as long as they were all boosted to appropriate orbits before destruction) without the risk of falling death… if not, is it possible, and if possible, what mass of “Starlinks” would it take and what sort of dispersal pattern would be required to create aforementioned pretty rings? Just a thought…
Drew, you might not realize how sparse those satellites are. People forget how big the Earth is. The Earth's surface area is about 510 million km². There are only about 15,000 manmade satellites in orbit. So that's 34,000 km² per satellite. That's huge. It's 8.4 million acres or 3.4 million hectares. There's just one manmade satellite in orbit per 8.4 million acres of "real estate" up there (and that's ignoring the vertical dimension). Nine U.S. States are smaller than that. It's 1.24 times the size of Massachusetts. That's why collisions are extremely rare, and why even if the satellites were full of toxic hypergolic fuel they would still have negligible environmental impact when they reenter.
The question of the Sun setting or rising on the moon is interesting. I calculate that it wouldn't be very quick, but would take about 56 minutes, based on the Sun's apparent diameter of 0.5 degrees and the moon taking 28 days to rotate.
If you love it, put a ring 💍 around it - except if it’s the Earth 🌎