It took off slowly because they were not running at 100% power in the first place. It was like 80% or 90% of full. Then add in losing 1/6 of the engines at the start and yeah, it definitely did not rocket off the pad. (heh heh yeah I said it)
Bah
"we don't need a flame trench"
He literally said this back in 2020. He blew up his own rocket.
RIP Dodge minivan windows
So uh, how will this look to their car insurance company?
So uh, how will this look to their car insurance company?
"Act of God (Elon)."
How much of that smoke and dust cloud is extremely toxic?
How much are American tax payers getting fleeced to rebuild a launch pad that Elon blew up?
How much are American tax payers getting fleeced to rebuild a launch pad that Elon blew up?
Way less then they're getting fleeced for SLS.
How much of that smoke and dust cloud is extremely toxic?
Methane (propellant for Starship) and oxygen form carbon diode and water when they react, so the "smoke" is very not toxic. The concrete dust on the other hand......
Plus whatever else was in the launch pad when it got blasted to hell.
Plus whatever else was in the launch pad when it got blasted to hell.
Speaking of which, SpaceX Starship explosion spread particulate matter for miles:
SpaceX launched the largest rocket ever built for the first time on Thursday from its Boca Chica, Texas, spaceport. The Starship spacecraft, designed to fly people on a Mars mission someday, lifted off the launch pad then blew up in mid-flight, with no crew on board.Now, residents and researchers are scrambling to assess the impact of the explosion on local communities, their health, habitat and wildlife including endangered species. Of primary concern is the large amount of sand- and ash-like particulate matter and heavier debris kicked up by the launch. The particulate emissions spread far beyond the expected debris field.
As a result of the explosion, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) grounded the company’s Starship Super Heavy launch program pending results of a “mishap investigation,” part of standard practice, according to an email from the agency sent to CNBC after the launch. No injuries or public property damage had yet been reported to the agency as of Friday.
Could today slow down a little?
So recently saw a vortex model of the solar system. Of course PBS shows how that's not exactly accurate but the truth is even cooler I think. Worth 15 min of your time.
Dammit! *digs frantically through old pile of 1980's textbooks*
I'm not "gaining weight"; my cosmological constant is increasing, thankyouverymuch.
I'm not "gaining weight"; my cosmological constant is increasing, thankyouverymuch.
"That red shift looks really slimming on you"
A hypothesis that can’t be tested isn’t scientific, it’s a fairy tale. See also: string theory.
Constellations of satellites swarming Earth's orbital skies are currently polluting wavelength bands that are supposed to be protected for radio astronomy.
According to new research, the electronics on board SpaceX's Starlink satellites are 'leaking' low-frequency radio waves, separate from their allocated downlink bands, in a way that could impact our ability to perform astronomy
A hypothesis that can’t be tested isn’t scientific, it’s a fairy tale. See also: string theory.
But an hypothesis that we can test in the future is still scientific. As long as there is a plausible test for it, and evidence in hand to support it, it can be explored, if people wish, to see how useful it would be if it tested out when we have the engineering to do it.
In 1865, Gregor Mendel first proposed the hypothesis of inheritable units that pass from parent to child (genes, as later called), but it was not until 1966 that Nirenberg et al finally crack the code of proteins in DNA and allow chemical identification and differentiation of genes in chromosomes. The hypothesis stood for 101 years without being fully explainable, but it clearly was not "a fairy tale", or unscientific.Note that even though Mendel cheated mathematically, fudging his numbers to make the ratios work in the face of problems he could not understand, his hypothesis was later shown to be still valid. (Indeed, it was the effort to tear down his "too perfect" data that actually discovered the cheating and explained the unaccounted issues that led to his falsification, neatly advancing the hypothesis instead of destroying it.)
Remember, there are a ton of examples of this. It was 1865 when Gregor Mendel first developed the hypothesis of inheritable units that pass from parent to child (genes, as later called), but it was not until 1966 that Nirenberg et al finally crack the code of proteins in DNA and allow chemical identification and differentiation of genes in chromosomes. The hypothesis stood for 101 years without being fully explainable, but it clearly was not "a fairy tale", or unscientific.
An hypothesis is scientific if its formulation follows the currently accepted method in its field, and survives what countering evidence is raised. It becomes a theory when positive evidence is presented that explains its phenomena better than previous hypothesis AND there are no credible counter-hypotheses that survive based on the existing evidence. Either can be falsified or improved by later improved methods or new data, but that just means that hypotheses are not static, but rather change pragmatically as evidence and testing capabilities improve over time.
As long as there is a theoretical way to test it, an hypothesis can be investigated to the limits of our abilities. Then we wait to see what happens. That's how science often works. That's why string theory is still a thing. (Note that the use of the word "theory" there is more loose than I gave above; that's fine, everyone gets that its short-hand, and it actually has provided useful mathematical advances in many fields, such as the study of black holes. Scientists are allowed to be imprecise in their nomenclature for reasons of convenience, just like everyone else lol).
Many (most?) aspects of Einstein's Theory of Relativity were untestable when he published. For example, time dilation at extreme speeds or in a gravity well.
RiddleSeid: Coming to DC in 2024.
Someone please find a 42 out there
This reminded me of my favorite fact about Space Force: Like personnel who serve in the Navy are sailors and personnel; that serve in the Army are soldiers, Service personnel in that branch of the military are referred to as Guardians.
ceased to exist as a result of a collision with the lunar surface.
AKA it crashed!
That is a NY Post-worthy headline. 
:chefskiss:
Pages