It would appear to be an old hackneyed phrase. But it is quite significant in terms of this blog. It is so significant, that I am going to make a habit of starting each day with a status report on this blog's production. If my blog can't make it commercially, I lose credibility. So, I am going to have to do this. It now goes with the territory. (another apparent hackneyed expression, lol)
How will I do this? I will use the sitemeter down below to give me some a verifiable performance metric. I can report that here, or you can see for yourself at the bottom of the page. I can't do that with all measurables, but I will try to report as many of these as I can. The site meter says 4404 visitors to this page.
Is that accurate? It is over a nearly 7 month period. I think it is about as accurate as Blogger's own stats, which are combined with Sitemeter's contribution ( a recent addition), which is explained here. The problem is that the two metrics are in conflict. Blogger reports more pageviews than Sitemeter, but sometimes it is the other way around. I started using Sitemeter back in Feb, but it started counting more pageviews than Blogger until I figured out why. Then, I reset Sitemeter to the Blogger number and began displaying the number on the bottom of this page. I started that recently.
The numbers still conflict, so I may need to adjust the number in order to get back into some realistic number.
As of this writing, Sitemeter says 4404, Blogger says 4525. I have Blogger configured not to count my pageviews, but I think it counts some of them anyway. But Sitemeter appears to be not counting all pageviews, because its number is smaller than Blogger's. Maybe I should report both.
Sponsors will be displayed on the front page. I can have a featured sponsor and other sponsors that are not featured with a display on the front page, but on a dedicated page. A featured sponsor gets a dedicated page, which are limited in availability. The Experimental Page is that page. By the way, Blogger gives me 10 pages, including the home page. I have already used about half of these. Perhaps I can get rid of some of those and make room for more sponsors. But since I have no sponsors as of this time, there is plenty of room now. I will leave a products page, because I have already promised this to a few folks. This will stay as it is as long as the blog is here. I am going to keep the index for navigation page.
Candidates for removal? Let's see 1) Little Search Engine that could 2) and the about me page. There is room in the Profile link page that Blogger supplies, so this is a redundancy that can be eliminated. The Little Search Engine that could can be combined with the Index page. That leaves up to six pages for sponsors.
The pricing for Sponsors? I can offer a featured display for a nominal fee now, with the caveat that prices will be adjusted higher if the readership grows. The featured page can continue for a limited time in which it will have to be renewed. Each featured Sponsor will get a dedicated page for no extra charge. Once the time on the feature ends, the dedicated page will remain for a limited time as well and will expire later. ( this to be determined on an ad hoc basis) All sponsors will get on the Products page and continue for as long as the blog does. This is free. I have a few of these now and those can be observed by going to the products page.
One of these is Chris Laird, who I mention quite frequently on this blog. I okayed it with Chris and everybody else on that page.
I can start pricing the sponsorships at a bid, as like an auction. The price will start at 99 cents. Anybody who wants to sponsor this page for a week, can make a bid for that starting now. All bids will be displayed on the status report. If you want to bid privately, send an me an email. Or if you want to contribute and get a sponsorship that way, you can.
As of this writing, there are no sponsors because this is brand new. We will see how it goes. I will report this on a daily basis here each morning with my first post, along with the latest Blogger stats and Sitemeter stats. If I have to make adjustments, I will report that at this time. The navigation label will be put on the sidebar, as this will be a new label entry for the sidebar entry.
I have a video on YouTube that demonstrates how these labels work. You can access my videos at the bottom of this page. It is called video bar and it points to my YouTube page. Look for the video on my YouTube Page. I will go there and include it in a playlist, if I haven't done that already.
Update:
8:35am
I think the mechanism by which a bid may be placed could be in the form of a comment. You can do it two ways by making a private offer, or a public bid. If there was a private offer, it will supercede a bid if it exceeds the bid. That means, if there was a bidder for the 99 cent minimum and somebody did better privately, that will supercede the bid. The private offers will posted as the highest bidder, so that anyone bidding can have a shot at winning.
As I mentioned, proceeds for this auction will go to support the Space Show, not me. This auction will end 1 week from today at the hour of my original post here, which was about an hour ago.
If you like the Space Show, and this blog, please support it by making a bid. Payment can be by the PayPal button on this page. I am doing a DBA business arrangement here, so I own the business and will have to pay taxes on it. Of course, if this business ever amounts to anything, I will want to change that to a non profit corporation. But there is no justification for that yet.
Update:
9:39am
I have made the changes indicated above, plus I moved Sitemeter's stats up toward the top of the page.
10:00 am
The example slideshow for the sponsors there have actual photos taken by yours truly. It is in a Picasa Web Album and they are public. I may have mentioned this before, but will do so again. All you need is some photos and a product to sell. These photos were made by a camera phone. Most camera phones will allow you to email yourself so that you can get your picture out of the phone and into a computer so that it can be transmitted or uploaded to the Picasa Web Album. All Google asks for is an email address. It can be any email address, I would imagine. The Web Album is divided into public and private albums. The one you need for this application must be public.
Restrictions for the albums: use your common sense. Porn or violence not acceptable, of course. Saleable merchandise is. Suggestions and feedback welcome.
Update: 11:00 approx
I said earlier that this blog hasn't earned a cent. It has actually earned 1 dollar from an Amazon sale. But it cannot be collected yet because the sum was too small. As for anything else, there has been no donations. The other revenue source, AdSense refused to pay the 180 dollars that they said the blog earned. It is rather pricey for so few pageviews, but the blog does get pageviews. And they paid nothing for them at all.
Al Fin: "Cowboy Commentary", aka "Eat your veggies" The Flag banner is posted in order to defy those who would make patriotic symbols illegal or disreputable.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Monday, April 11, 2011
Funny vid
What if there was a real colony on Mars and there was a bad guy like Kohagen, who wouldn't give the people air? So, I started looking at YouTube videos of Total Recall
. This one was pretty good.
. This one was pretty good.Too bad I didn't study physics
My knowledge of physics consists of a single high school course. Aside from that, I have no formal schooling on the subject. So, what comes next may be taken with an extra large grain of salt.
Since I first saw the Dense Plasma Focus concept, I've been intrigued by it as a potential propulsion system. This interest just increased when I saw this Wikipedia entry on the subject of fusion. The idea that grabbed me was the caption on the right side of the page which includes this equation:
This grabbed me because the fusion reaction produces "kinetic" energy. This is the kind of energy that you want for a propulsion device. Does this mean anything significant? Well, I wish I knew, but I don't. I know that the c squared part of this equation is a very, very large number. And m, meaning mass is a very small number for a single atom of helium four, pictured with the mentioned caption. "Mev" means million electron volts, if I am not mistaken. It must be a lot of energy, because the reaction is far more energetic than fission, which yields plenty of energy itself.
What is the practical effect of the change in delta m? What velocity does this mean in terms of kinetic energy? It must be a large number, I would think. It would seem that if this reaction can be produced with enough mass, then considerable kinetic energy can be formed. There would be no need to heat up a reaction mass as the kinetic energy thus supplied could be significant enough in its own right to propel a spacecraft. That is what interests me.
Since I first saw the Dense Plasma Focus concept, I've been intrigued by it as a potential propulsion system. This interest just increased when I saw this Wikipedia entry on the subject of fusion. The idea that grabbed me was the caption on the right side of the page which includes this equation:
kinetic E = Δmc2, where Δm is the change in rest mass of particle
This grabbed me because the fusion reaction produces "kinetic" energy. This is the kind of energy that you want for a propulsion device. Does this mean anything significant? Well, I wish I knew, but I don't. I know that the c squared part of this equation is a very, very large number. And m, meaning mass is a very small number for a single atom of helium four, pictured with the mentioned caption. "Mev" means million electron volts, if I am not mistaken. It must be a lot of energy, because the reaction is far more energetic than fission, which yields plenty of energy itself.
What is the practical effect of the change in delta m? What velocity does this mean in terms of kinetic energy? It must be a large number, I would think. It would seem that if this reaction can be produced with enough mass, then considerable kinetic energy can be formed. There would be no need to heat up a reaction mass as the kinetic energy thus supplied could be significant enough in its own right to propel a spacecraft. That is what interests me.
The debt limit fight will be different?
I don't think so. Logic suggests that if they couldn't handle the easier job, like this last one, they won't be able to handle the tougher one coming up. They've surrendered already, this game is over.
People love scary stories
It is an observation. Bad news is news, good news is no news. Headlines are made that way. If a cure is found for cancer, it won't be as interesting as the death of a million people. If the choice came between these two stories as top billing, which one do you think would receive it? Is there any doubt?
That's why I am skeptical whenever I hear really scary news, like a EMP device. Not that some wacko may have one of these, and even use it. But the odds of this actually being deployed in any meaningful way seems doubtful. The more likely thing would be for the Koreans to sell the technology to someone else. Or to try to blackmail the USA into paying them not to deploy it. This kind of thing has worked for them before. Why not try it again?
What can you do about such a device if it exists? All things considered, any advanced power can already make one. If someone wants to do this, it is already possible, if I am not mistaken. By Murphy's Law, therefore, if it can exist, it probably already does.
What can you do about it, then? If there are meaningful countermeasures, then that is what should be pursued. Frankly, I don't know enough to know what that might be.
If, by any chance, this is already covered, it then wouldn't be news anymore, now would it?
That's why I am skeptical whenever I hear really scary news, like a EMP device. Not that some wacko may have one of these, and even use it. But the odds of this actually being deployed in any meaningful way seems doubtful. The more likely thing would be for the Koreans to sell the technology to someone else. Or to try to blackmail the USA into paying them not to deploy it. This kind of thing has worked for them before. Why not try it again?
What can you do about such a device if it exists? All things considered, any advanced power can already make one. If someone wants to do this, it is already possible, if I am not mistaken. By Murphy's Law, therefore, if it can exist, it probably already does.
What can you do about it, then? If there are meaningful countermeasures, then that is what should be pursued. Frankly, I don't know enough to know what that might be.
If, by any chance, this is already covered, it then wouldn't be news anymore, now would it?
Chris Laird alert about books
He says that our books may be tampered with, if we are not careful. If you allow everything to be put on an ebook basis, they can be tampered with. Better to have a big, bulky book which cannot be tampered with, than to have an electronic one that can.
Good point. I don't trust the sons of bitches, either.
Good point. I don't trust the sons of bitches, either.
Friday's space show, April 8, 2011
Announcement: pay attention to newsletter and schedule, only a few shows in next few weeks.
No bad phone lines anymore, will hang up if line is bad.
Can't do show without contributions, looks like he asks for support on every program
reminder that it costs a lot of money for certain shows. Costs money to produce. Gives it away for free. My reaction: sure, if you got the money. If you don't?????
Has to get tough with listeners who are calling too soon. Introduces guest: Bob Zimmerman. Frequent guest on John Batchelor Show. One of top people he says. Behind the Black.com is his website. Bob is politically minded. More inclusive and broad than usual.
He says he likes comments on the website. David mentions SpaceX. Bob talks a bit about it. Falcon heavy 50 tons into LEO. Second most powerful rocket built. Spacex has a timeline and it looks firm.
He will be a leader in everything, says Bob. 1/10th cost of shuttle. Innovations to reduce the cost. How? Use strap ons for more power. Simple and straightforward. Not new technology, strap ons have been around a long time. He is building because the market needs. Makes Constellation more and more unnecessary. NASA can't dictate terms, he is in driving seat. Smart in every way. Consistent with Elon Musk, Bob says.
David asks about press conf. IPO question. David quotes paragraphs
Musk might take public next year, but doesn't want to relinquish control. Goals: to create self sustained colony on Mars.
(My comment) Don't hitch star to Musk. I like going to Mars, but that has to wait until we are ready. Don't always agree with Musk. He uses batteries on Tesla. Not fuel cells. Going to Mars is too ambitious. Zimmerman is gushing over SpaceX. I like what they are doing, but not a Mars mission this way.
(resume) SpaceX is growing company. (comment) Success is coming from competing against a moribund NASA. EZ act to follow.
(resume)SpaceX a threat? Ans: Opinion has changed. Not taken seriously. Now something of a threat. The threat is real, and they have to respond in like kind. Boeing, for example, lived off government all these years. Didn't have to lower costs. Faced with reality that SpaceX may end their business. Other example, ATK.
(comment) A bit of discussion about lower launch costs. What did I just do yesterday? But I didn't listen to this show on Friday. This puts me behind in a way.
ATK resumed: discussion of how ATK has changed. Bob points out that we are entering a period of transition. He says not as bad as Soviet Union. ( comment: we shall see)
Bob compares the old way to the way the old Soviet Union used to do things. Actually, from what I read yesterday, we could learn a lot from the Russians. This is too self congratulatory for what should have been long ago and could still go wrong. Nothing has happened yet. Time to rethink he says. I agree.
First caller "Marshall" asks about costs for getting a man rating. Can Musk get around paperwork requirements? Ans. Not waiting for NASA to tell him, he builds it and offers it to them instead. Put himself in strong position, gives faith he will produce in future.
When NASA shows up with paperwork, won't ignore them, but if NASA tries that, he can shut them up. Example FAA holds back license, like Scaled Composites, everybody sees them as standing in way.
Don't have to beg NASA for approval. Bert Rutan effect. Got ahead of curve, and tamed the bureaucracy. Not waiting for regs.
David: SpaceX is bright side. Asks about gov't shutdown. Shut down the most visible ones that upset the public. Political gamesmanship.
Salaries stop? If shutdown, will not be paid. ( I think they know that they will get paid) People are in pain (part of transition Bob says, you have to find it yourself).
Gov needs to get out of way. Get accused of bad things, but have to face realities that need to transition.
David says he thinks they are letting America down. (So, everything I said earlier in my own blog says the same thing, only he said it first. So it looks like I am parroting him, but I am not. I didn't hear the show.)
Bob says the government is the Emperor with no clothes. (Hah! I did say that before this show.)
NASA's funding is vulnerable because of New Space as well as the political milieu in which it finds itself these days.
Bob: Congress will waste a lot of money because they are still playing politics the same way they have been playing it all along. A political reality that prevents it from actually solving any problems.
Comment: the last election didn't force enough of these guys out. Nothing fundamental has changed. Business is still business as usual. I said this before the election and afterward.
Bob says "we are a democracy, we are in charge". I say really? The government is still doing what it damn well pleases.
David asks about other countries, Bob replies that most countries are still following Soviet style model. Russia is now more private than before, and is getting more money from its government. India is also following the Russian model, he says. China is old Soviet model, and they are not in it for profit. ( This indicates the feeling that they are rolling in dough and don't have to economize. This is what will bite them hard in the ass at some point in the future.)
comment: Bob's analysis of the business may be a little in conflict with what I found yesterday. Russia's success is that they keep it simple. America's problem is that we made our systems too complex and therefore, costly.
Some discussion of ITAR regs.
Bob emphasized transition. Out of control budget. (yes) Decline of manufacturing and growth in public sector. Where does money come from? Going bankrupt. Can't pay for space program if we are bankrupt. (yes) People won't recognize problem (yes Gushes over SpaceX again.)
Observation: He goes on about the transition and how, in his judgment, Obama doesn't want to shrink government, except for NASA. In effect, he wants to end NASA, without ( my comment here: any concern for what that may mean for this country. This is in keeping with a highly negative view of Obama, which appears to be greatly justified. People simply do not get the point here, I suspect.)
David mentions that Bob is Tea Party. Oh well. That pretty much wipes him out for the libs. They won't listen to this guy.
(Me again. Is the Tea Party interested in military spending? They should be. If they want to keep military spending and space programs, they may find that these conflict. Can't fund them both at this level. This is a big, big, issue. They need to get this right, because there isn't enough time.)
break in the program. One hour into it.
James Webb Space Telescope discussion: crowding out other science projects. Started as a 1.5 billion program, now at 6 billion. Originally scheduled for 2011, now 2015. Cost overruns have to come from somewhere. New projects can't start until Webb gets paid for.
Other programs have "died". ( Speculation alert: What if this happened for the same reason everything else does? What if they didn't keep it simple, but insisted upon doing it the most expensive way possible?)
I'm sorry, but the rest of this bores me. And annoys the living crap out of me. It is the same beast in a different costume. The same damned thing. I won't get bogged down discussing the same crap over and over again.
I am going to shut down the rest of the program at this point. This is belaboring the obvious by now.
Update:
resume the program
It appears from what Bob says, that the space program will be solidly in the hands of the private sector by the next election. That means that it won't be a political issue.
Question (Rob in Denver) came up about Musk's trying to get to Mars, and he said that he may not have considered it as well as he could have. Bob said he wrote a book about that Leaving Earth. Money not problem, he says, having the will to do it. Baffles him, he says. Can get his book on his website.
In fifties, most big science done by private industry. Musk, he says, doesn't need to know that now. He's getting the ball rolling. Government won't get us there. (I agree)
David says he may forbid emails, because he really wants phone calls.
Discussion about academia. Yawn. Will have to adapt, or go out of business. (true for anyone, anywhere, on any subject)
Comment by John caught my attention: More interest in educational value in a generic
sense than in actually solving a problem, unless moonlighting for a specific industry.
Real world v academia discussion. David is in academia himself, so he speaks from
experience here. Mentioned students activism leading to letters to Congress by graduates and undergrads alike. They can drive the discussion, he says. Ahead of the game. You can sign these letters, Seds letter (seds.org), future of human spaceflight.
Bob says universities are too dependent on government funding.
Another example which is analogous to the rocket problem in another post. Water recycling was too heavily engineered v the Russians system. More likely because they wanted to spend a lot of money as opposed to actually solving a problem.
Politics of climate science has warped the science itself. (comment: waste of money,
anyway in my opinion.)
Personal responsibility only process that works, he says. Process is a way to cover
your ass, he says. Needs personal responsibility. Government process is designed so that nobody will take the blame. ( David jokes about hate mail.)
Update:
Dr. Livingston is on again this afternoon, but I think I will defer on that broadcast today. I may return to it afterwards, though. The topic isn't that compelling for me, as I am most interested in propulsion, as opposed to guidance. I think guidance and control is definitely important, of course, but propuslion is more high priority for me.
No bad phone lines anymore, will hang up if line is bad.
Can't do show without contributions, looks like he asks for support on every program
reminder that it costs a lot of money for certain shows. Costs money to produce. Gives it away for free. My reaction: sure, if you got the money. If you don't?????
Has to get tough with listeners who are calling too soon. Introduces guest: Bob Zimmerman. Frequent guest on John Batchelor Show. One of top people he says. Behind the Black.com is his website. Bob is politically minded. More inclusive and broad than usual.
He says he likes comments on the website. David mentions SpaceX. Bob talks a bit about it. Falcon heavy 50 tons into LEO. Second most powerful rocket built. Spacex has a timeline and it looks firm.
He will be a leader in everything, says Bob. 1/10th cost of shuttle. Innovations to reduce the cost. How? Use strap ons for more power. Simple and straightforward. Not new technology, strap ons have been around a long time. He is building because the market needs. Makes Constellation more and more unnecessary. NASA can't dictate terms, he is in driving seat. Smart in every way. Consistent with Elon Musk, Bob says.
David asks about press conf. IPO question. David quotes paragraphs
Musk might take public next year, but doesn't want to relinquish control. Goals: to create self sustained colony on Mars.
(My comment) Don't hitch star to Musk. I like going to Mars, but that has to wait until we are ready. Don't always agree with Musk. He uses batteries on Tesla. Not fuel cells. Going to Mars is too ambitious. Zimmerman is gushing over SpaceX. I like what they are doing, but not a Mars mission this way.
(resume) SpaceX is growing company. (comment) Success is coming from competing against a moribund NASA. EZ act to follow.
(resume)SpaceX a threat? Ans: Opinion has changed. Not taken seriously. Now something of a threat. The threat is real, and they have to respond in like kind. Boeing, for example, lived off government all these years. Didn't have to lower costs. Faced with reality that SpaceX may end their business. Other example, ATK.
(comment) A bit of discussion about lower launch costs. What did I just do yesterday? But I didn't listen to this show on Friday. This puts me behind in a way.
ATK resumed: discussion of how ATK has changed. Bob points out that we are entering a period of transition. He says not as bad as Soviet Union. ( comment: we shall see)
Bob compares the old way to the way the old Soviet Union used to do things. Actually, from what I read yesterday, we could learn a lot from the Russians. This is too self congratulatory for what should have been long ago and could still go wrong. Nothing has happened yet. Time to rethink he says. I agree.
First caller "Marshall" asks about costs for getting a man rating. Can Musk get around paperwork requirements? Ans. Not waiting for NASA to tell him, he builds it and offers it to them instead. Put himself in strong position, gives faith he will produce in future.
When NASA shows up with paperwork, won't ignore them, but if NASA tries that, he can shut them up. Example FAA holds back license, like Scaled Composites, everybody sees them as standing in way.
Don't have to beg NASA for approval. Bert Rutan effect. Got ahead of curve, and tamed the bureaucracy. Not waiting for regs.
David: SpaceX is bright side. Asks about gov't shutdown. Shut down the most visible ones that upset the public. Political gamesmanship.
Salaries stop? If shutdown, will not be paid. ( I think they know that they will get paid) People are in pain (part of transition Bob says, you have to find it yourself).
Gov needs to get out of way. Get accused of bad things, but have to face realities that need to transition.
David says he thinks they are letting America down. (So, everything I said earlier in my own blog says the same thing, only he said it first. So it looks like I am parroting him, but I am not. I didn't hear the show.)
Bob says the government is the Emperor with no clothes. (Hah! I did say that before this show.)
NASA's funding is vulnerable because of New Space as well as the political milieu in which it finds itself these days.
Bob: Congress will waste a lot of money because they are still playing politics the same way they have been playing it all along. A political reality that prevents it from actually solving any problems.
Comment: the last election didn't force enough of these guys out. Nothing fundamental has changed. Business is still business as usual. I said this before the election and afterward.
Bob says "we are a democracy, we are in charge". I say really? The government is still doing what it damn well pleases.
David asks about other countries, Bob replies that most countries are still following Soviet style model. Russia is now more private than before, and is getting more money from its government. India is also following the Russian model, he says. China is old Soviet model, and they are not in it for profit. ( This indicates the feeling that they are rolling in dough and don't have to economize. This is what will bite them hard in the ass at some point in the future.)
comment: Bob's analysis of the business may be a little in conflict with what I found yesterday. Russia's success is that they keep it simple. America's problem is that we made our systems too complex and therefore, costly.
Some discussion of ITAR regs.
Bob emphasized transition. Out of control budget. (yes) Decline of manufacturing and growth in public sector. Where does money come from? Going bankrupt. Can't pay for space program if we are bankrupt. (yes) People won't recognize problem (yes Gushes over SpaceX again.)
Observation: He goes on about the transition and how, in his judgment, Obama doesn't want to shrink government, except for NASA. In effect, he wants to end NASA, without ( my comment here: any concern for what that may mean for this country. This is in keeping with a highly negative view of Obama, which appears to be greatly justified. People simply do not get the point here, I suspect.)
David mentions that Bob is Tea Party. Oh well. That pretty much wipes him out for the libs. They won't listen to this guy.
(Me again. Is the Tea Party interested in military spending? They should be. If they want to keep military spending and space programs, they may find that these conflict. Can't fund them both at this level. This is a big, big, issue. They need to get this right, because there isn't enough time.)
break in the program. One hour into it.
James Webb Space Telescope discussion: crowding out other science projects. Started as a 1.5 billion program, now at 6 billion. Originally scheduled for 2011, now 2015. Cost overruns have to come from somewhere. New projects can't start until Webb gets paid for.
Other programs have "died". ( Speculation alert: What if this happened for the same reason everything else does? What if they didn't keep it simple, but insisted upon doing it the most expensive way possible?)
I'm sorry, but the rest of this bores me. And annoys the living crap out of me. It is the same beast in a different costume. The same damned thing. I won't get bogged down discussing the same crap over and over again.
I am going to shut down the rest of the program at this point. This is belaboring the obvious by now.
Update:
resume the program
It appears from what Bob says, that the space program will be solidly in the hands of the private sector by the next election. That means that it won't be a political issue.
Question (Rob in Denver) came up about Musk's trying to get to Mars, and he said that he may not have considered it as well as he could have. Bob said he wrote a book about that Leaving Earth. Money not problem, he says, having the will to do it. Baffles him, he says. Can get his book on his website.
In fifties, most big science done by private industry. Musk, he says, doesn't need to know that now. He's getting the ball rolling. Government won't get us there. (I agree)
David says he may forbid emails, because he really wants phone calls.
Discussion about academia. Yawn. Will have to adapt, or go out of business. (true for anyone, anywhere, on any subject)
Comment by John caught my attention: More interest in educational value in a generic
sense than in actually solving a problem, unless moonlighting for a specific industry.
Real world v academia discussion. David is in academia himself, so he speaks from
experience here. Mentioned students activism leading to letters to Congress by graduates and undergrads alike. They can drive the discussion, he says. Ahead of the game. You can sign these letters, Seds letter (seds.org), future of human spaceflight.
Bob says universities are too dependent on government funding.
Another example which is analogous to the rocket problem in another post. Water recycling was too heavily engineered v the Russians system. More likely because they wanted to spend a lot of money as opposed to actually solving a problem.
Politics of climate science has warped the science itself. (comment: waste of money,
anyway in my opinion.)
Personal responsibility only process that works, he says. Process is a way to cover
your ass, he says. Needs personal responsibility. Government process is designed so that nobody will take the blame. ( David jokes about hate mail.)
Update:
Dr. Livingston is on again this afternoon, but I think I will defer on that broadcast today. I may return to it afterwards, though. The topic isn't that compelling for me, as I am most interested in propulsion, as opposed to guidance. I think guidance and control is definitely important, of course, but propuslion is more high priority for me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)