Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


5,279 Excellent


Profile Information

  • About me
    IRL Aero Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This is very literally a famous thought experiment that Einstein considered. And his answer was that time itself starts to change and run at different rates.
  2. There is no point zero. The big bang happened at every point in the universe. At the same time. Trippy, right?
  3. My understanding of this, influenced by a book by Katie Mack that I happen to be reading this week: This goes to the heart of the "cosmological principle". The idea is that there is no special point in the universe. There is not even a "center" of the universe that everything is expanding away from. At any location in the universe, the entire universe will be seen to be expanding away from you. Furthermore, while there is a "center of the observable universe" (us), that's only a function of how observation works. Any other place in the universe would also be "the center of the observable universe" to someone who was there to observe from that location. Despite the intuitive idea that the big bang happened at some location, some point, and then everything expanded away from it, that is not the current theory. The big bang had no location and did not take place at any moment in time, because space and time as we know them in our universe only started to exist after the big bang. How can we say that there has been a finite amount of time since the big bang, but that the big bang did not happen at any point in time? That's kind of like how the function 1/x can be defined for any positive x as close or far from 0 as you like, but does not actually exist at x=0. Another way to say it is that since the entire universe was all together at the big bang, then the big bang happened at every location in the universe.
  4. https://www.npr.org/2022/05/21/1100534373/boeing-docks-space-station-iss Not a single mention of the most important VIP onboard the ship. Shoddy journalism.
  5. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2022-05-17/china-us-are-in-a-space-race-to-make-billions-from-mining-the-moon-s-minerals Journalists should really avoid writing about technical subjects if they don't understand them. The article claims helium 3 is a "replacement for uranium" -- Um ... what? Should someone writing an article about this know that uranium is a fissionable and helium 3 is a potential fusion fuel? And so not only is it not a direct replacement, and not only has no one ever yet built a practical fusion power plant, but also it's only speculation that we might find any practical source of helium 3 on the moon? I am not at all convinced that lunar mining will ever be much of a resource for terrestrial industry, simply because everything available on the moon is also available on the earth. I could see the moon being a handy source of materials for space-based industry.
  6. Apparently they are waiting right now until they can make sure they are not going to have a TDRSS handover during the middle of it.
  7. It's a thrilling demonstration of Newton's first law of motion.
  8. I still feel like the only thing more tedious than docking two ships in KSP is watching a real life docking. I'm sure it's different if you are there on site.
  9. I don't know. You should ask the galaxy-brain genius who wrote the article. I bet he could explain.
  10. Vacuum tube, remember? No air, no issues. (Well, OK, lots of issues, but not that issue.)
  11. For that chart hijackings, terrorist attacks, military shootdowns, and intentional crashes are not considered "accidents". Also, crashes during flight testing are not included. That excludes 9/11, the Ethiopian 767 hijacking, and the Egyptian 767 murder/suicide. The 767 fatal hull losses are then the Lauda Air mid-flight thrust reverser deployment and the Air China CFIT crash. The 2019 incident with the Atlas Air frighter happened after that chart was made.
  12. They've been flying Atlas Vs for a long time now. I think they have earned our trust that they know what they are doing.
  13. "Mach 23"? Aren't they at an altitude where the concept of "Mach number" is basically unimportant?
  • Create New...