OT: Save the Hubble

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chakolate
  • Start date Start date
C

Chakolate

For the stargazers among us, please consider signing this petition:

http://savethehubble.org/petition.jsp

Chakolate

--
Whence cometh this silly notion that every electrical circuit must have a
ground? Speaking as a scientist, I blame electrical engineers. Science is
pure and holy. It's when engineers put science into practice that things
get messed up.
--SDSTAFF Chronos
 
It might be wise to consider funding the replacement instead of
servicing the Hubble. As remarkable as the Hubble is, there are plans
to replace it with an even more amazing package. It's been a few
years, but another with 3x the optics of Hubble was on the board with
all sorts of other instruments. I'm not sure what the current plan is.


I am a huge Hubble fan. It seems time to move forward again though.
The ability to peer even further is exciting. I don't think the budget
will allow for both, given the unreal declaration of men to Mars as
the future focus of Nasa. It looks like a painful choice must be made.

Hubble has made its mark, without doubt.
 
For the stargazers among us, please consider signing this petition:
Click to expand...
http://savethehubble.org/petition.jsp
Click to expand...

Here is a nice site that will calculate the next time you can see
Hubble (or a few other orbiting satellites) from your location:

<http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/realdata/sightings/SSapplications/Post/JavaSSOP/JavaSSOP.html>

It needs to be a dark night. The list of major cities is scanty, but
you can enter your coordinates if you are not close to a major city.
 
Chakolate said:
For the stargazers among us, please consider signing this petition:

http://savethehubble.org/petition.jsp

Chakolate
Click to expand...

Considering how much the Hubble has done for science and the general
public as a whole at the very least it should be retrieved and displayed
at the Smithsonian. The government certainly manages to find
astronomical sums of money to spend on far less deserving endeavors.
 
It might be wise to consider funding the replacement instead of
servicing the Hubble. As remarkable as the Hubble is, there are plans
to replace it with an even more amazing package. It's been a few
years, but another with 3x the optics of Hubble was on the board with
all sorts of other instruments. I'm not sure what the current plan is.


I am a huge Hubble fan. It seems time to move forward again though.
The ability to peer even further is exciting. I don't think the budget
will allow for both, given the unreal declaration of men to Mars as
the future focus of Nasa. It looks like a painful choice must be made.

Hubble has made its mark, without doubt.
Click to expand...


I have no problem with letting the Hubble go once the new scope is in
place. But I'm not willing to let the Hubble die when there's no guarantee
the new scope will ever lift off, nor that it will work when it gets up.

All things in their proper order, IMO.

Chakolate
 
I have no problem with letting the Hubble go once the new scope is in
place. But I'm not willing to let the Hubble die when there's no guarantee
the new scope will ever lift off, nor that it will work when it gets up.
Click to expand...

The new scope isn't designed to use the visible spectrum of light,
so you won't get those beautiful images we've been getting from
the Hubble. Once the Hubble stops working, those end.
 
Considering how much the Hubble has done for science and the general
public as a whole at the very least it should be retrieved and displayed
at the Smithsonian. The government certainly manages to find
astronomical sums of money to spend on far less deserving endeavors.
Click to expand...

Exactly! Why can't they put it in one of the STS-## cargo bays and bring it
home?
IMO the news about what they plan on doing with it was dis-heartening.
I've been following the HST from the beginning; from the depressing news
that it's main mirror had not been ground properly, the breathtaking space
walk that so-successfully corrected that problem and all the fantastic
images it has returned to be shared by all the people of Earth.
One damn Shuttle mission to boost the decreasing decay of orbit shouldn't
be must to ask. (Easy for me to say)
Another opinion while I'm ranting: The HST has been a far better success
story than the Space Transport Ships (STS), which have a 1 in 50 chance of
making it back safely.
I have always thought the money would have been more wisely spent on a
vehicle that could go up on it's own and come back on it's own. I have more
rants and don't have anymore space for them.
Ok. A couple more.
NASA's short and long-term planning is in need of an influx of younger more
daring thinkers and engineers who can say, "Why not?", instead of, "We
can't ...".
They have spent over 850 million dollars for the two Mars rovers which most
people say - I among them - was money well spent.
Leave Hubble up there until it's time to bring it home.
 
The new scope isn't designed to use the visible spectrum of light,
so you won't get those beautiful images we've been getting from
the Hubble. Once the Hubble stops working, those end.
Click to expand...

ARGH! I did NOT know that. Okay, now I *really* want to save the Hubble.

Chakolate
 
ARGH! I did NOT know that. Okay, now I *really* want to save the Hubble.
Click to expand...

The photos are stunning and revealing. They give a pretty good gauge
of what is out there and in our place in the scheme of things. This
article states the Hubble has ovserved 1/10th of 1% of our
surroundings (2002). Nice read:

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/hubble_ngst_010817-1.html

Infrared is probably best for peering even further back into time.
Optics are really problematic, but I figured the planned 3x opticals
would be well worth it. Unfortunately NASA has been hit with budget
cuts hard. And the costs aren't simply monetary. Here is an old link
about Columbia's planned visit for a tuneup:

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/sts109_update_020110.html

We lost far more than money and equipment in Columbia. To be effective
look at the cost estimates of simply putting a man back on the moon:

http://www.space.com/news/okeefe_congress_040128.html

Then figure the costs of a manned mission to Mars. Solar eruptions
are enough to kill a crew in a spaceship. The thing to do is to mount
a campaign to keep NASA monies more Earth based... you need to write
the pinhead in charge here: (sorry, a spade is a spade and we have a
pinhead currently IMHO)

http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

The single step of men to the moon as a "base" to Mars _alone_ would
fund 170 Hubbles at the price it was created previous to the 1990
launch. It is near impossible to shield astronauts from radiation and
to keep them generally alive on a 3 year voyage. This is simply a JFK
'vision' to rally the people.

We don't have the money to fund Mars. We can do exceptional things
with our feet on the ground with _a portion_ of that money.

The current replacement is the James Web Space Telescope. Proposals
come and go as funds are promised and vaporized, but this looks like a
nice package! (Jan 2004)

http://ngst.gsfc.nasa.gov/

http://ngst.gsfc.nasa.gov/FastFacts.htm

JWST:
Proposed Launch Date: August 2011
Diameter of primary Mirror: ~6.5 m (21.3 ft)

Hubble:
Primary mirror: 2.4 m (94.5 inches) in diameter
Secondary mirror: 0.3 m (12 inches) in diameter

If we can only fund one, which one do you choose?

You really hit on an area of interest for me. Sorry it's not freeware
related folks...
 
Seen this?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3444853.stm
Click to expand...

That was good news so far. The last paragraph was encoraging.
And what the hell are they doing on the ISS besides letting their bodies
turn to jelly. Ya, I realize it's to test long-term effects of no-gravity
situations but those guys are up there on one long looonely vacation. We
nor the Russians are sending them up any new projects to do. We're not
putting together any more pieces to the ISS puzzle. Once again, np
long-term planning.
 
Back
Top