Sammi14h ago

I feel I need to say something about Artemis as a former NASA employee, Space scientist and engineer.

I hope more than anything that the astronauts get back safely. But let us not be fooled by what this is.

Is it spectacular, yes. Is it a feat of engineering, yes. Does it make any advance in science, no. Does it help mankind explore the universe, dubious at best.

Why exactly are we sending humans to the moon? With our technology we will never send humans much further than Mars. The only way humans can possibly go further is through a scientific breakthrough. Good luck with that when Trump is gutting science.

Human exploration needs money spent on long-term advances - not using the same technology to do what we did before, however, glamorous it is.

So why do this and why do it now? Political theatre, a win for a Trump led NASA if it succeeds.

So I hope all works well and all return safely. But let us be clear what this is and why it is being done.

This is my opinion, I do not represent anyone.

Show threadNaomi Heartbreak14h ago
@SamanthaJaneSmith surely in the midst of a war over the last few drops of oil in the world this is nothing but disgusting?
Show threadSammi13h ago

@paranoiapen Well the two things have always been decoupled to some level, although the rationale for manned spaceflight has always been defence. The US is in space not because it's good for humanity but because of military interests and the glory of the US of A.

It is always part of military or cultural domination at the political, funding level. Politicians know of nothing else.

It must also be said that the US is not the only country that acts this way.

Show threadWoozle Hypertwin10h ago

@SamanthaJaneSmith @paranoiapen

Personally, it gives me optimistic feels that we are still able to do stuff like this despite all the BS we are also doing.

Watching an ISS spacewalk during the previous Tr#mp misadministration was one of its few bright spots (for me) -- a brief view of extreme competence amid all the self-serving twittery.

Show threadPetra van Cronenburg
@woozle For me, the ISS is also a symbol that humankind could much better cooperate on earth. When astronauts of "enemy' states can live and work together in such a small room, we could also live in peace on earth.
My dream is still that spaceflights become a global cooperation (yes, I watched the very first Star Trek and the first moon landing live.)
@SamanthaJaneSmith @paranoiapen
1:08pmWeb
Show threadWoozle Hypertwin9h ago

@NatureMC

 

More space exploration, more science, more caring and empathy.

Less bombs and stupidity.

(I was too young for Trek's first run, but I do remember the moon landing. One of the good things my dad did...)

@SamanthaJaneSmith @paranoiapen

Show threadNaomi Heartbreak8h ago
@woozle @NatureMC @SamanthaJaneSmith my point was really meant to be emphasis on the oil tho. Like there's none left, right? So how do you power the thing? I mean, without destroying the planet we actually have...
Show threadSammi8h ago
@paranoiapen @woozle @NatureMC It doesn't use oil to power it although of course most manufacturing processes use oil.
Show threadWoozle Hypertwin7h ago

@paranoiapen @NatureMC @SamanthaJaneSmith

I don't know what the fuel mix is in general, but I know that at least some rocket fuel is just hydrogen -- combines with oxygen, leaving behind deadly DHMO (aka water) exhaust.

I think the SRBs (solid rocket boosters -- the first stage) are something different -- let me check it...

Wikipedia confirms that the main rocket is hydrogen+oxygen... and the SRBs are apparently:

I don't know the exact production processes; I suppose the nitrogen (which is in both the oxidizer and binder molecules) might be fossil-fuel derived, but I suspect not?

Dihydrogen monoxide parody - Wikipedia