Stargazing

[OLAS]

What's so special about today with the special program, BBC reporters in Kazakhstan and a feckin' countdown timer to launch?

We've had British, Afghan and Mexican people in space before...

You'd be forgiven if you just tuned in and thought it was a solo expedition by member of the royal family.

[DonnyTJS]

Coverage is massively over the top for what seems a fairly routine event these days. Loved the Apollo coverage as a kid, but this seems a bit barking. BBC making up for loss of sports events, I s'pose.

Edited December 15, 2015 by DonnyTJS

[Huddersfield]

I think a lot of it is to do with lobbying for funding these days. NASA, ESA, etc. all have to keep upping the ante to justify the vast spending, so you need a fairly constant stream of dramatic or dramatised stories to keep people interested.

Water spouts on Enceladus, landing on comets & so on do the trick for me, local bloke does routine trip a hundred miles up less so.

[Orraloon]

I thought this was going to be about the Geminids.

http://www.timeanddate.com/astronomy/meteor-shower/geminids.html

IMO this one launched a couple of weeks ago to try to detect Gravitational Waves was much more interesting but didn't get anywhere near this level of coverage. It they can detect them it will back up another one of the predictions which came out of Einstein's relativity theory.

http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/LISA_Pathfinder_en_route_to_gravitational_wave_demonstration

[OLAS]

All of England counting down...

[phart]

I thought this was going to be about the Geminids.

http://www.timeanddate.com/astronomy/meteor-shower/geminids.html

IMO this one launched a couple of weeks ago to try to detect Gravitational Waves was much more interesting but didn't get anywhere near this level of coverage. It they can detect them it will back up another one of the predictions which came out of Einstein's relativity theory.

http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/LISA_Pathfinder_en_route_to_gravitational_wave_demonstration

Same

[glasgow jock]

Do you all know there is an Alien base on the dark side of the moon & ancient ruins on Mars ?

https://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://cdn.fansided.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/229/files/2015/11/ancient-aliens.png&imgrefurl=http://fansided.com/lists/ronda-rousey-facts/ronda-rousey-ancient-aliens/&h=300&w=600&tbnid=9dQq6YGVCGxXxM:&docid=8Ej2iVwfV78MYM&ei=u_VvVr7oDISna4urr6AE&tbm=isch&ved=0ahUKEwj-sb_63d3JAhWE0xoKHYvVC0QQMwg1KAMwAw

[biffer]

The difference is this is the first time the UK has funded an astronaut. Other brits in space have been on programmes funded by NASA or someone else.

[biffer]

I thought this was going to be about the Geminids.

http://www.timeanddate.com/astronomy/meteor-shower/geminids.html

IMO this one launched a couple of weeks ago to try to detect Gravitational Waves was much more interesting but didn't get anywhere near this level of coverage. It they can detect them it will back up another one of the predictions which came out of Einstein's relativity theory.

http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/LISA_Pathfinder_en_route_to_gravitational_wave_demonstration

LISA is an astonishing bit of science. When the main mission goes up sometime around 2032, it'll give us a whole array of info we've never been able to detect before.

[Orraloon]

Do you all know there is an Alien base on the dark side of the moon & ancient ruins on Mars ?

https://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://cdn.fansided.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/229/files/2015/11/ancient-aliens.png&imgrefurl=http://fansided.com/lists/ronda-rousey-facts/ronda-rousey-ancient-aliens/&h=300&w=600&tbnid=9dQq6YGVCGxXxM:&docid=8Ej2iVwfV78MYM&ei=u_VvVr7oDISna4urr6AE&tbm=isch&ved=0ahUKEwj-sb_63d3JAhWE0xoKHYvVC0QQMwg1KAMwAw

Despite what Pink Floyd tried to tell us the moon doesn't have a dark side. Well it does, but it isn't permanently dark like some folk seem to think. So, if this Alien base is located on the "dark side " it would need to be constantly moving to stay in the dark bit.

[OLAS]

The difference is this is the first time the UK has funded an astronaut. Other brits in space have been on programmes funded by NASA or someone else.

Cheers. Must have missed Cox or O'Brien mention it.

[phart]

has there been a change of font on here?

[Orraloon]

has there been a change of font on here?

Not that I've noticed.

[Guest]

Despite what Pink Floyd tried to tell us the moon doesn't have a dark side. Well it does, but it isn't permanently dark like some folk seem to think. So, if this Alien base is located on the "dark side " it would need to be constantly moving to stay in the dark bit.

The moon has a synchronous rotation and always presents the same hemisphere to the Earth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_locking

Edited to correct myself for mis-reading your post; this doesn't mean the far side is always shrouded in darkness but never presents itself towards earth.

Edited December 15, 2015 by Mash it up Harry

[Orraloon]

The moon has a synchronous rotation and always presents the same hemisphere to the Earth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_locking

Edited to correct myself for mis-reading your post; this doesn't mean the far side is always shrouded in darkness but never presents itself towards earth.

Absolutely correct and to avoid ambiguity it should be referred to as "The far side of the moon". At different times we can see a total of about 59% of the moons surface from Earth. It wobbles a bit.

[Guest]

Just moving the thread off at a slight tangent. There are some interesting alternatives to the notion that current rocket technology is a true reflection of present propulsion capabilities. I find it hard to understand how, when technology has advanced so dramatically in so many other spheres, that propulsion research/tech has somehow stalled and is little more advanced than it was in the 50s. Anyone have any thoughts on this and links/books/material relating to possible alternatives?

There's a fellow called Edgar Fouche who emerged in the late 90s, talking about a particular craft - the TR3B - with a radically different technology which affects the mass of the craft (my brain is fuggy today). There's a mixture of material out there (an online search on his name or the craft will turn up a lot of stuff if folk are interested), some of which attempts to discredit him and his claims but my feeling is that, on balance, he seems credible.

Edited: this craft possibly features alternative propulsion and there's other material available online but Fouche's claims are to do with mass reduction.

Edited December 15, 2015 by Mash it up Harry

[Guest]

Just moving the thread off at a slight tangent. There are some interesting alternatives to the notion that current rocket technology is a true reflection of present propulsion capabilities. I find it hard to understand how, when technology has advanced so dramatically in so many other spheres, that propulsion research/tech has somehow stalled and is little more advanced than it was in the 50s. Anyone have any thoughts on this and links/books/material relating to possible alternatives?

There's a fellow called Edgar Fouche who emerged in the late 90s, talking about a particular craft - the TR3B - with a radically different technology which affects the mass of the craft (my brain is fuggy today). There's a mixture of material out there (an online search on his name or the craft will turn up a lot of stuff if folk are interested), some of which attempts to discredit him and his claims but my feeling is that, on balance, he seems credible.

Edited: this craft possibly features alternative propulsion and there's other material available online but Fouche's claims are to do with mass reduction.

Just searched on Mr Fouche's name and realised there's been a complete w*******st over discrediting his revelations, which I was unaware of since I last looked (late 2000s). I may want to revise my assessment of his credibility in light of this. Note to self: perform current search on potential source before committing to a post.

[Toepoke]

I find it hard to understand how, when technology has advanced so dramatically in so many other spheres, that propulsion research/tech has somehow stalled and is little more advanced than it was in the 50s.

Successful inventions tend to be refined and not radically changed.

Airliners haven't changed much since the 1960s. Their jet engines are similar now to ones from WWII.

The internal combustion engine is still powering most vehicles after 150 years...

Edited December 15, 2015 by Toepoke

[Guest]

I take your point Toepoke, why re-invent the wheel (or jet engine) and all that, but also feel that economies based on oil/petroleum and the petrodollar also play a significant role in defining the direction of visible/mainstrem research. Given the wealth production and moneterisation directly connected with a reliance upon and management of this predominant form of power, there is a huge dis-incentive to publicly research alternatives. A number of the major aerospace companies were involved in electrogravitic research in the 50s, which was widely reported in mainstream media as the next big thing, and it then disappeared from sight. Wiki is quick to assert that's because the science wasn't really there and also that anyone who says anything to the contrary (i.e. the research went 'black') is a 'conspiracy theorist'. However, there are plenty of examples where this is likely to have been the case i.e. research goes off the books but it's very difficult to obtain hard data to support it, due to what becomes highly secret and compartmentalised research. I realise this sounds like 'conspiracy-speak' but from the reading I've undertaken, this does indeed seem to be how 'black projects' function. If you've any doubt look at the scale of something like the Manhatten project, the number of folk involved and how secrecy was maintained.

[biffer]

Rocket engines were developed in war, when vast amounts were spent on research, and developed further during the space race, again when vast amounts were being spent. That level of investment in research is no longer available - less investment => slower progress.

Main problems with any kind of em based propulsion is the requirement for superconductivity to make it viable. That's not available except at very lo temperatures.

[Guest]

The funding exists, as part of the black budget or even beyond this. US Dept of Defence black budget, according to various sources online, was north of $50 billion dollars in 2012. This is mainstream information and mainly pertains to intelligence spending so it's likely the real figure is far greater. Rumsfeld mentioned the missing/untracked 2.3 trillion in Pentagon expenditure pre 9/11. There are various explanations for this depending on the source. Extraordinary profligacy or worse, whichever way you view it it suggests lack of oversight and control.Suffice to say the black world has the potential to access vast sums of money, which is effectively off the books. I should also add, that I agree with a number of commentators in this field, that responsibility for the genuine space program shifted away from NASA long agao (a propaganda/PR mechanism, IMO) to a number of other agencies - the precise split/breakdown again depends on the source.

Fouche, the chap I mentioned earlier, I believe talked about quasicrystals in 1998 and highly pressurised mercury/plasma long before the former were recognised in 2011 when their discovery was awarded the Nobel prize for chemistry. With regard to Fouche as a source, I haven't had a chance to fully look into the more recent attacks on his credibility. These adhominen attacks are prevalent and typical on the spheres in which this information circulates(fringe, admittedly) and is also often tainted by tinfoil hattery and properly nonsensical pseudo-science. I think I have seen a later detailed interview with Fouche and the attempts at discrediting him were based on an ill-advised drunken YT video. In any case, his claims remain interesting given his apparently proveable airforce record and secret clearance.

Proof. Not in any hard way. There just seem to be enough rumblings/anecdotal stories in this arena (Secret Space Program) to be suggestive of something genuinely occuring. There are entire conferences/seminars now dedicared to this notion; the presenters/information varies in quality/credibility but is worth a look for those interested in this field or even if you look upon it as little more than sci-fi.

[Barney Rubble]

Anyone else totally bored with the Sky wankfest over this?

[Orraloon]

Anyone else totally bored with the Sky wankfest over this?

Are you being forced at gunpoint to watch it? I'm not bored with it. I haven't seen any of it.

[Guest]

Links to some of the gravity modification rumblings, if anyone's interested and to demonstrate it's not just in my conspiracy-addled noodle:

BAE involvement;

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2000/mar/27/uknews

Boeing;

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1403060/Boeing-joins-race-to-defeat-gravity.html

Honda;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/benjamin-t-solomon/hondas-gravity-modification-research_b_7531260.html

http://www.americanantigravity.com/news/space/eugene-podkletnovs-gravity-beam-generator.html

Podkletnov appears to be the man of the moment (last 20 years, at least). In the 50s it was the Thomas Townsend-Brown's Biefield-Brown effect, dismissed as ion winds and not gravity modification but re-visited and re-appraised in the huffpost article above.

Edgar Fouche's (he of the TR3B secret aircraft) original 1998 presentation here. He also talks about some other interesting technology he saw in the 70s in use on black projects - e.g. 1GHz computer processor not available commercially until around the year 2000 amongst other things - suggestive of the commonly held belief (at least for a few folk) that the black world is about 20-30 years ahead of the white. TBH is any of this has been developed earlier, which is possibly the case, the 'black' world may well have become what some commentators refer to as a 'breakaway civilisation':

http://www..com/watch?v=pKnDQ2qDuwkyoutube

More detailed interview with Mr Fouche here;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKcIO_Qmr9I&list=PLduAC5d8yaEa6i3jx0jf_DxCvxu8Ax6Z0

Apologies for diverting the thread somewhat off topic. Haven't seen any of the coverage but good luck to the brave soul in orbit. Think it's a case of 'look over here at the zenith of our capabilities', while over there, where hopefully very few people bother to point their conscious attention, we've got the really good stuff.

[Toepoke]

Didn't realise there's actually been 7 British born astronauts. There's and 8th, born in South Africa too...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_space_programme