|
|||
|
But we digress-
the topic is Shuttle, and more broadly, space-based research.
The high cost of lifting payloads to orbit, for example, has provided a hefty and often unappreciated incentive to miniaturize systems and cram more capability into smaller payloads. This ability to miniaturize scientific instrumentation has often been applied to purely terrestrial devices such as television cameras for domestic use. Simulating the harsh conditions of launch and the orbital environment has helped to make more rugged and reliable devices as well. These are just two ways that space exploration has had significant indirect benefits to the terrestrial economy, can you think of more? PONDER,T. ![]() |
|
|||
|
Not your tripe
which has nothing to do with the topic, I observe. Nor have you addressed my resopnse to your earlier feeble sally:
"The people in the photograph could very easily be among the 500,000 Gypsies(Rom) who were killed just as dead as the Jews of the infamous Holocaust. Or homosexuals. So when do they get their own little countries and billions of American taxpayer dollars, eye? Meanwhile, schmuck, you have yet to explain why it is you champion the Israeli cause, as they are pursuing a policy very similar to that of Nazi Germany regarding a despised ethnic minority." How very unusual. ![]() PEACE,T. ![]() |
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
|||
|
Quote:
![]() |
|
|||
|
No reply?
I'm SOOOOO disappointed!
So we might as well return to the topic- Why IS it that the debate about the design of the next STS (Space Transportation System) is always limited to chemical rocket designs, despite their obvious limitations? What about THIS instead: http://www.nuclearspace.com/a_road_not_taken.htm ATOMSFORPEACE,T. ![]() |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|