We already know that's not the cause. Time is the same no matter which way you travel through the universe. Time is changed by the speed that you travel through space.

Feel free to submit your own posts.

Not with that attitude, pshh

The amount of energy required to cause changes that weren't very localized would be so high that you could probably fix any impacts for half as much energy

Seems like the real problem is the way governments prioritize things.

NK: literally hates fish and throws missiles into the ocean

SK: seemingly hates the sky and throws stuff into orbit

I don't get why interplanetary travel takes up so much of this subs time when it's nowhere near attainable or sustainable in any of our lifetimes.

Edit: people,.give me an ETA when we can blast the moon with microwaves.

Then tell me how long that will take to apply that tech to Mars.

Then laugh at yourselves, lmao.

[removed]

Are any of these craft something that the Webb telescope could find to get a look at? non-astronomy person here.

Exactly. My take on those people's thinking:

"Say, boss, I noticed that this thing called thorium is also radioactive."

"Can it be turned into nukes?"

"Uhhhh.... It's harder, but yo-"

"Scrap it! Uranium is better for our purposes, then. Forget about thorium."

You have to be incredibly il-informed to think this. NASA literally funds SpaceX and helps them develop a lot of their tech. SpaceX just allows NASA to avoid the real hamstring: congressional requirements on budget. And don’t get to thinking it’s all NASA either, SpaceX has it own tech it also has pushed (of course from previous NASA considerations but notably bringing them to reality).

Outside of space, you really have to not understand what’s going on to think the gov doesn’t innovate. Nearly all advancements in the hard sciences come out of our national labs/nsf grants/nih/etc. Like it’s a modern marvel/gift we have these programs and people just don’t even know about them and say things like “government can’t innovate”. It’s just ridiculous.

The real question is... did that mongol got to orbit with a rocket stuck in the chest? Was the first human in orbit that dude?

Where are they now? You can just screw off with the space com links.

Revised: Aug 19, 2022 Voyager 1 Spacecraft (interplanetary) / (Sun) -31 http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/voyager-1/

BACKGROUND See the web-page above for information on the Voyager Mission

TIMELINE 1977-Sep-06 Launch from Kennedy Space Center @ 12:56 UTC 1979-Mar-05 Jupiter closest-approach, Io imaging 1980-Nov-12 Saturn encounter, Titan 1990-Jan-01 Interstellar mission begins 1990-Feb-14 Final Voyager image return 1992-Apr-24 Final two-way tracking measurements 1998-Feb-17 Exceeds Pioneer 10 distance (most distant man-made object) 2004-Dec-15 Crosses solar system "bow shock" boundary 2012-Aug-25 Passes heliopause and termination shock boundary

SPACECRAFT TRAJECTORY: This trajectory is composed of two merged sections:

#1) 1977-Sep-5 to 1981-Jan-1:
      A patched conic mission-design type trajectory in which the conics 
      were constructed to approximately match specific events, such as
      satellite encounters, providing a rough accuracy. 

#2) 1981-Jan-1 to 2100-Jan-1 
      Refit of tracking data spanning 1981-1992 (end of two-way coherent 
      transponder data). Done in 2022 by R. Jacobson (former Voyager
      navigation) using DE440 to generate a new solution and prediction. 


The reconstruction done in 2022 estimated: - Epoch state vector - Constant and stochastic non-gravitational accelerations (to account for the activity of three-axis attitude control system) - Thermal radiation from RTG power sources - Mismodelling of solar pressure- 96 impulsive maneuvers through Feb 1992

Note there has been no new tracking data possible since 1992. This is a different issue from on-board telemetry, which continued beyond that date.

The 2022 update refit the existing old tracking data using modern approaches and standards to allow consistent extrapolation to 2100.

Formal predicted geocentric pointing uncertainty on 2030-Jan-1: RA +/- 1.701 arcseconds, DEC +/- 1.535 arcseconds

This uncertainty is consistent with the new solution's difference with the A54206 prediction made in 1990.

Tracking data used in 2022 solution: Points Type       First point            Last point       residual rms 2366   F2   01-JAN-1981 05:14:00  15-APR-1989 08:09:00  0.133 mm/s 2084   F3   07-JAN-1981 12:15:00  24-APR-1992 14:04:00  0.153 mm/s 5191  PRA   01-JAN-1981 03:52:18  20-JAN-1989 14:13:59  228 m 67  SRA   04-MAR-1989 10:58:56  13-OCT-1991 04:49:30  227 m

Ephemeris / WWW_USER Sat Dec 31 06:48:24 2022 Pasadena, USA / Horizons

Target body name: Voyager 1 (spacecraft) (-31) {source: Voyager_1_ST+refit2022_m} Center body name: Earth (399) {source: Voyager_1_ST+refit2022_m} Center-site name: GEOCENTRIC

Start time : A.D. 2022-Dec-31 00:00:00.0000 UTStop time : A.D. 2023-Jan-01 00:00:00.0000 UTStep-size : 1440 minutes

Target pole/equ : No model availableTarget radii : (unavailable)Center geodetic : 0.00000000,0.00000000,0.0000000 {E-lon(deg),Lat(deg),Alt(km)}Center cylindric: 0.00000000,0.00000000,0.0000000 {E-lon(deg),Dxy(km),Dz(km)}Center pole/equ : ITRF93 {East-longitude positive}Center radii : 6378.1 x 6378.1 x 6356.8 km {Equator, meridian, pole}Target primary : Earth (R_eq= 6378.137) kmVis. interferer : MOON (R_eq= 1737.400) km {source: Voyager_1_ST+refit20Rel. light bend : Sun {source: Voyager_1_ST+refit20Rel. lght bnd GM: 1.3271E+11 km^(3/s2)Atmos refraction: NO (AIRLESS)RA format : DEGTime format : CALEOP file : eop.221229.p230324EOP coverage : DATA-BASED 1962-JAN-20 TO 2022-DEC-29. PREDICTS-> 2023-MAR-23Units conversion: 1 au= 149597870.700 km, c= 299792.458 km/s, 1 day= 86400.0 s

Date\_\_(UT)**HR:MN     R.A.**\_(ICRF)\_\_\_DEC             delta      deldot

$$SOE 2022-Dec-31 00:00     258.76000  12.01263  159.294289399766   7.3891871 
2023-Jan-01 00:00     258.76627  12.01350  159.298442434604   6.9937694 $$EOE

Column meaning:

TIME

Times PRIOR to 1962 are UT1, a mean-solar time closely related to the prior but now-deprecated GMT. Times AFTER 1962 are in UTC, the current civil or "wall-clock" time-scale. UTC is kept within 0.9 seconds of UT1 using integer leap-seconds for 1972 and later years.

Conversion from the internal Barycentric Dynamical Time (TDB) of solar system dynamics to the non-uniform civil UT time-scale requested for output has not been determined for UTC times after the next July or January 1st. Therefore, the last known leap-second is used as a constant over future intervals.

Time tags refer to the UT time-scale conversion from TDB on Earth regardless of observer location within the solar system, although clock rates may differ due to the local gravity field and no analog to "UT" may be defined for that location.

Any 'b' symbol in the 1st-column denotes a B.C. date. First-column blank (" ") denotes an A.D. date. Calendar dates prior to 1582-Oct-15 are in the Julian calendar system. Later calendar dates are in the Gregorian system.

NOTE: "n.a." in output means quantity "not available" at the print-time.

'R.A.___(ICRF)___DEC' = Astrometric right ascension and declination of the target center with respect to the observing site (coordinate origin) in the reference frame of the planetary ephemeris (ICRF). Compensated for down-leg light-time delay aberration.

Units: RA in decimal degrees, ddd.fffff{ffff} DEC in decimal degrees, sdd.fffff{ffff}

'delta deldot' = Apparent range ("delta", light-time aberrated) and range-rate ("delta-dot") of the target center relative to the observer. A positive "deldot" means the target center is moving away from the observer, negative indicates movement toward the observer. Units: AU and KM/S

Computations by ...

Solar System Dynamics Group, Horizons On-Line Ephemeris System
4800 Oak Grove Drive, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Pasadena, CA  91109   USA

General site: https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/
Mailing list: https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/email_list.html
System news : https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/horizons/news.html
User Guide  : https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/horizons/manual.html
Connect     : browser        https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/horizons/app.html#/x
              API            https://ssd-api.jpl.nasa.gov/doc/horizons.html
              command-line   telnet ssd.jpl.nasa.gov 6775
              e-mail/batch   https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/ftp/ssd/hrzn_batch.txt
              scripts        https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/ftp/ssd/SCRIPTS
Author      : Jon.D.Giorgini@jpl.nasa.gov

Also, just see which way a deep space network dish is pointing when it is tracking VGR1 and receiving 160 bits per second.

In this day and age, the only reason to develop solid rockets for civilian purposes is if you want to have the technology ready to build ballistic missiles if needed. Liquid fuel rockets are just so much better.

You will eventually be spaghettified regardless. In a large enough black hole it's after you cross the event horizon but before hitting the singularity.

You should rely on facts, rather than petty insults.

Here this very matter is discussed: https://www.jneurosci.org/content/36/7/2077

>Sagan's biographers have argued that the Academy's rejection of Sagan, and Harvard's prior denial of his tenure, were the direct consequence of the phenomenon that has become known as the “Sagan Effect”: the perception that popular, visible scientists are worse academics than those scientists who do not engage in public discourse. Yet, later analyses of Sagan's output have indicated that his academic contributions compared favorably to those of other Academy members

You may want to read about the "Carl Sagan effect".

[removed]

[removed]

Lasers and microwaves are both pretty inefficent for this. A few dozen heliostats could easily melt regolith from lunar orbit. Focusing a hundred square meters of reflected sunlight on a single square meter will melt a diamond when there's no atmosphere to attenuate the energy.

Why would you think that?

Think of the closest example, airplanes. Airplanes exist. We didn't need a government-funded air race to get them. The very first airplane was entirely developed and funded by private capital.

The truth is, had there been no space race or NASA, we would've gotten something like SpaceX far, far sooner.

Government involvement didn't help, it stagnate space development for decades by keeping private endeavors out of it. It's still messing with them to this day.

On the contrary. You're probably thinking of the health industry in the USA. Guess what has ruined it? The government. It's in a state where it isn't fully government-run, but it isn't really private either. It's overregulated and with an insanely large government presence that messes everything up.

If there has been no Space Race or NASA, SpaceX would not exist.

Once again.

Gravity doesn’t “come from” mass.

Also google isn’t a book

[deleted]

Perhaps we should start with the first Chinese use of solid propellant rockets against their Mongol invaders, in 1232 AD.