Can We Talk About Rich People Bullying NASA? | Astrophysicist Reacts
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 чер 2024
- 00:00-02:23 Abstract
02:23-06:49 Introduction
06:49-11:30 Who is Jared Isaacman?
11:30-15:14 NASA's Concerns
15:14-17:15 Concern 1 (Tech Limitations)
17:15-20:47 Concern 2 (HST is Fine)
20:47-21:26 Concern 3 (Too Much Time)
21:26-24:22 Concern 4 (Airlocks)
24:22-27:35 Concern 5 (Risk)
27:35-32:05 Concern 6 (HST is Delicate)
32:05-56:04 Discussion
References:
science.nasa.gov/mission/hubble/
www.npr.org/transcripts/12502...
www.npr.org/2024/05/16/125025...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_I...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polaris...
I do other things too, join our discord server!
♥ Twitter: / ur_compassrose
♥ Twitch: / yourcompassrose
♥ Discord: / discord - Наука та технологія
The birth date of a telescope is usually the date in which it takes its first image. What is often called "first light".
I was also thinking that lol. But it's also like when a baby takes its first steps haha! (The baby-telescope metaphor doesn't really work too well...)
@@YourCompassRose baby also has first light
That's true
...and for every inch of aperture on a new telescope, thou shall get three weeks of clouds.
@danielppps arguably, Hubble is not simply a telescope; it is also an object in space, orbiting the Earth (a satellite). For such objects, I think launch dates would be used by many as important "mission start" dates, in addition to "first light"... soo.... whatever
Idk how you got recommended but I'm glad you did. As someone without a college degree you present complicated topics very easily.
Here for this kind of content. Good info and perspective. I appreciate the reporting.
Excellent sci comm, you were recommended in my home feed randomly so it seems you are pleasing the algorithm. Keep it up👍
The fact that you mantained a respectful approach while reporting, though not leaving out you personal feeling, made me enjoy this video a lot. Thank you!
Good stuff :)
OMG ITS JESSE AGAIN :O
L I'm obsessed with this video. Thank you for creating such valuable and important content!
Hell yeah, my sister in science! Thanks for watching
I'd love to see Hubble get upgraded again, but I'd hate to see a bunch of amateurs eff it all up.
Draken is a small contractor doing DACT. USAF mostly does its own training.
Good to know. I wasn't too sure from my quick search haha
Dang good video. I dabbled in the sciences a long time ago. All matches what I think. Love calling this rich techbros "children". :)
The "children" are the only ones advancing spaceflight to any meaningful degree. SLS is an obsolete decades in the making disaster, same with Orion.
I'd say you were overly polite and reasonable in your words, given you were spot-on in your assessment :D
Thanks. I try to be polite when I can
In the world of IT, there has been a trend of treating servers like "cattle", not "pets". Pets are unique and precious, hard to replace and it's a tragedy when they die. Cattle are meant exist in large numbers, and replaced often. Cattle dying is common and unremarkable.
HST is a pet. Servicing it would cost a lot of time and money, for a telescope that's ancient already. Sure it has been upgraded, but all that is still operating within tje constraints of decisions made 40-50 years ago.
Maybe with all the launch capacity that SpaceX has (with a massive cargo bay as well when Starship becomes operational), it's time to turn Space telescopes into cattle. Don't make one. Make 20. Each one can be less ambitious than a flagship mission, but just get something out there at a level that still useful. As better technology comes along, send up updated models. Current space telescopes are massively complicated because they need to extremely reliable. If you can reduce the requirements on success rate from 99.999% to something like 85% and be okay with that, that can come with huge simplifications and cost reductions.
I hope one day we can reach a situation like this.
That's a really good point, I'm glad you shared this! It's a good reminder that most space projects are also outdated by the time we actually send them out (because of the time constraints), so it would be neat to get them out faster for sure.
Thank you, I'm going to steal this analogy. We need not deify Musk and SpaceX. They are cattle. Let's milk them, as is their due.
I feel sorry for Isaacman’s wife. I’m sure in the Inspiration4 video he promised her that this was his only space mission. Now he’s planning 3 very dangerous missions g including the first crewed flight of Starship, which must be the most dangerous mission since the last Columbia flight.
"Speculatively" dangling a carrot.
Allegedly >.> ...
2 minutes in and I already like you. Take charge, Rose! Good stuff. I don't know how the algorithm dropped me here, but it makes me happy. I have a pet peeve though that you hit in the middle: you used the word weary instead of wary and that is way too common for my taste. But yes, I really agree with your perspective on this.
Nice! Glad to have you.
i love this video and i think billionaires don't care about the fanboys simping for them in these comments
Maybe if they lick their boots hard/often enough the billionaires will give them attention!
Unrelated, but your hair looks sooooo good on camera :O goddess indeed!
Omg thanks! I love it so much~
its probably mostly a nostalgia thing
like I bet if they ever make it to the moon these guys are gonna wanna land next to tranquility base and set up a museum there
Tranquility reservation park?
Are their any astronauts left who serviced the Hubble? Certainly won’t be in ten years time.
Space X could fly up a new and improved Scope and ride the Hubble down and put it in the Air & Space Museum.
ja, heard it yesterday morning
Oh an hour of you going off!? Oh hell yeah!!
Thoughts and feelings come out!
Walk up those stairs behind you.
Apollo didn’t have airlocks, nor do I suppose Orion has.
If they were thirty when Hubble launched they would be 64 now.
a spaceman with an airplane degree 😅
Feel like Jared Issacman is not qualified to save Hubble. I will leave that task to actual astronauts.
like this video, kinda slow i feel like i had to have it on 2x speed to get through some unedited rambling
Sounds like NASA doesn't have a list of requirements to service HST. What have they done for two years? This is why folks like me want as much of space to be privatized as possible. You can pay a commercial company to care, the government only responds to power.
The shuttle is no longer in service , the HST is old , and they have new observatories to bother about
@@tyrantfox7801 "The shuttle is no longer in service" -- the shuttle didn't do anything. Instruments on board the shuttle did. She named several of them brought up by engineers in the article she was referencing. The shuttle doesn't matter.
"the HST is old" -- and?
"they have new observatories to bother about" -- and?
It doesn't matter if it's old and it doesn't matter if they have new things. HST has been without a serviceable craft since 2011. You're telling me in 13 years, 10 of which were before Webb was launched, someone couldn't be bothered to make a checklist of all the parts needed to service it if needed? They had a guy willing to fund work on it personally all they needed was one person with the clearance and access to make that checklist in *two years* after his request if the thought never crossed their mind before.
Giving billionaires more government money, power, & influence? Count me in, brother!
The HST has been an outstanding success, with cutting edge 1980s & '90s technology. But it's over 30 y/o and definitely showing its age. Time for a new observatory to follow on its success.
@@nicholashylton6857 "Giving billionaires" -- Privatization doesn't mean the government needs to buy their services. Just gtfo from impeding progress.
SpaceX has saved the government an insane amount of money compared to their previous providers. SpaceX's lack of competition on that front isn't due to any legal hurdles they're throwing at the industry.
"Time for a new observatory to follow on its success." -- and who do you think will build it? Some small thousandaire mom n pop shop? A billionaire with his *own private money* offered to service HST and you're rejecting it because of your blind bigotry.
Exactly what is the depreciated value of HST though? I know it initially cost billions, but it cannot retain that value, especially if it has a known time limit to it's life span. As that nearing future 10 years it has left gets nearer and nearer, it's value goes down significantly. Unless there are plans to retrieve it for some reason or restore it to a more stable orbit, in the end all it will be is so much scrap falling through the atmosphere (aprox. zero value to anyone). In any case, NASA can't really still think that it's worth billions anymore. HST might be delicate, but that's really a non-point seeing as what it's end state will be.
Next, risk. It's that dudes neck and money, let him do what he wants with it. They let the steam rocket guy try and launch without much hassle (I know not NASA's job, but neither is this). He's going up, ill prepared , to do something he wants to do.
All the other stuff with the airlocks and time in space, and all the stuff about risk acceptance is all up to the guy making the flight. If he wants to try to do it with what he's got what is there really to lose, excepting a dumb rich guy, his stuff and the HST (which is going to go away anyhow and thre rich guy seems to take personal risk lightly anyway). If he thinks he can do what he wants to do, let him try. Hell, if he wants to try and go up and grab the thing somehow and bring it back to show off or use as a garden structure, let him. It's his money and time and wellbeing and it's really not hurting NASA to let him do whatever.
It's going to end up as scrap. Would it make a difference if he just waited till the last minute and went up and tried to do something when it's even more dangerous, when the HST is ready to fall from orbit, in some dumb quest to "save" it? It's not 16 billion anymore, that is sunk cost. it's only worth the money it currently brings in, probably going down as time goes along and the descent gets nearer. There aren't any current plans to save the thing anyway, it's not like NASA would lose anything if they plan on doing nothing anyway.
I think the less scrap is in LEO, the better.
@@zimriel Exactly, but as she said, it's going to come down either way. Maybe with some rich guy trying to save it in some dumb way, attached to the side with tape or whatever, but come down it will.
With how cyber trucks quality are, it’s not worth giving space x the opportunity.
No one talks about how Elon musk intentionally puts small companies he thinks might become competitors on his rockets that somehow still explode.
@@NastySasquatch Ummm, excuse me, Space Ex rockets have never "exploded" they have had "unscheduled disassemblies" at altitude. Have you not watched their live broadcasts and public statements?
Guys/Gals, feel free to criticize Elon Musk and his dumb mistakes all you want. But it's important to keep your facts straight. The big explodey rocket is the Starship. It's an extremely ambitious rocket on a scale that will be necessary if we're ever going to go beyond flags and bootprints on the Moon. It's still in development, the road has been bumpy, but we should be glad someone is trying something. SLS might be reliable, but it is so expensive it can never go beyond what Apollo did. And other than that, there's literally no other option. Watching Starship explode is fun, but keep in mind it's pretty much our only hope for advancing crewed space exploration.
SpaceX's other vehicle, the Falcon 9 (and Heavy) on the other hand, are probably the safest rockets on operation to this day. They've had 2 mishaps around flight 20-30-ish (in 2015/16). They're currently on a streak of over 300 consecutive successful launches. They did around 100 launches last year, and are on track for about 120 this year. If I recall correctly, SpaceX alone lifted nearly 80% of _all_ mass to orbit last year. That other 20% is China, Europe, Russia, India and all their domestic competitors. And then we're not even talking about the hundreds of landings they've done as well.
So no they don't blow up their competitors. It's just factually incorrect. And about "not trusting" SpaceX... Your alternative would be Boeing, except they still don't have an operational crew vehicle. And if you're looking for a booster to fly the spacecraft, you're looking at Vulcan with a track record of a single flight (remember, Falcon 9 has 300 successes in a row), or New Glenn with a grand total of 0 launches.
So as shitty of a person that Musk is, SpaceX is market leader for a reason. Nobody else is in a position to even try. At some point, NASA may not have a choice but to trust them (or 100% lose HST)
It's not so much about giving them opportunity, but milking them for every last cent that they're worth. Or is it preferable that the common taxpayer should foot the bill? A bunch of rich fools with money to spend, who are we to talk sense into them?
@keithchiang9770 meh the only milking going on is the techs and engineers being underpaid to work their dream jobs
damn if you wanna be a rich guy in space and help astronomy with space telescope stuff then how about buildign your own space telescope and just making its data freely available?
instead of insisting on playing around on hubble
I mean seeing how many space telescopes so far have been launched on completely unmanned missions that seems like the way easier thing to do too
Because he wants to go to space to do it. And the telescope is already there.
@@fleshanthos he could still assemble his own telescope up there if he really really wants to
@@JulianDanzerHAL9001 He doesn't have a space truck to deliver it. I see where this guy is coming from. If he isn't willing to do the required training, then they needn't let him do it. But he's volunteering to extend the maintenance of a scope they abandoned due to cheap ass congress budget cuts. If the fuqtards would double NASAs budget to ONE CENT of your tax dollar, Hubble would be maintained AND boosted back up in orbit.
I love how you write off the rich as if they're some rich California girls. Are you just so swimming in funding? Or is it preferable to suck on the taxpayer's teat? As someone who doesn't care much for them, take their money, and use it to advance us. Obviously, cover your asses legally first. Don't thnk of the rich as individual people seeking opportunity. They are a resource to be exploited. Y'know, tit for tat. Machiavelli would find the modern day a goldmine.
Tit for tat indeed!
Robot arm not essential. Airlock not essential, but would be better. Anyway, they can install one or build it into a new one. You don't need much testing if you use NASAs designs. Space is getting PRIVATIZED. You don't get to tell private citizens how to do their space trips; that they have to follow your procedures. You don't get to tell them what to fund. You only get to tell them if they can't touch YOUR hardware.
Clearly nobody wants the dam thing falling out of the sky. We WANT it in a stable orbit so we don't lose it. But no moar space trux.
You might also consider that people with Don't Give a Shit $$$ are perfectly entitled to act like they don't actually give a shit. Musk did it to Iger. This isn't "Koombaya" bullshit.
Beautiful blouse - it kept me watching instead of just listening while playing D2.
Okay bootlicker 😂
The robot arm & air lock are unnecessary? NASA worked that way once.. Back in the early 1960s.
🧜♂🪐🌕🌚🗡🔭
🌛🌚🌜👽🔭