Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Free Willy on December 15, 2015, 04:43:27 PM
-
The Independent refers to Major Tim Peake as Britain's first Proper astronaut but has the generally secular humanist rag fit only for wiping your arse with got it right?
I thought the first British Astronaut was Helen Sharman.
-
I thought so too.
(btw: love the thoughtful and eloquent OP).
-
The Independent refers to Major Tim Peake as Britain's first Proper astronaut but has the generally secular humanist rag fit only for wiping your arse with got it right?
I thought the first British Astronaut was Helen Sharman.
So did I!
-
We have had several British astronauts over the years, including Helen Sharman. Many have had to become naturalised Americans to be able to travel with NASA, and I understand that Helen was paid for by big business/public subscription.
The reason they are - rather foolishly in my view - referring to Tim Peake as our first 'proper' astronaut is because he is the first one to be paid for out of the public purse.
-
I also think Astronaut is pushing it a bit as well.
They just go into orbit.
-
I also think Astronaut is pushing it a bit as well.
They just go into orbit.
Can you name any astronaut that has been out of the Earth's orbit?
-
Can you name any astronaut that has been out of the Earth's orbit?
Ooooh yer bugger, that's a slyboots, scientifically informed trick question :D
-
Ooooh yer bugger, that's a slyboots, scientifically informed trick question :D
is it JeeeSuus?
-
Behave :P
-
Can you name any astronaut that has been out of the Earth's orbit?
No.
There have been none.
But going to the moon was a big challenge.
Going into orbit is nothing.
We should be on Mars by now.
-
Can you name any astronaut that has been out of the Earth's orbit?
According to this there have been 24
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Apollo_astronauts
They are listed there :)
The earth doesn't orbit the moon ;).
-
Going into orbit is nothing.
Really? Did you see all the training that Tim Peake had to do? Also, getting in to orbit requires you to strap yourself to a massive bomb and hope that it doesn't blow up all at once. Getting out of orbit requires you to sit in a tin can that is heated up to several thousand degrees C and then hope that the parachutes haven't been fried.
I do not begrudge him the title of astronaut.
-
According to this there have been 24
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Apollo_astronauts
They are listed there :)
The earth doesn't orbit the moon ;).
This is the trick part of my question that Shaker spotted. When the astronauts were on the Moon, they were still in an Earth orbit because the Moon orbits the Earth.
-
This is the trick part of my question that Shaker spotted. When the astronauts were on the Moon, they were still in an Earth orbit because the Moon orbits the Earth.
But they had to leave the earths orbit when they set out towards the moon, they were no longer going around the earth or the moon , or in an earth orbit.
Had they missed the moon they would have kept going........ :o
Arguably they were when they orbited the moon again, but actually they were in a moon orbit rather than an earth one.
But initially when they set off towards the moon they broke away from an earth orbit
;)
-
But they had to leave the earths orbit when they set out towards the moon, they were no longer going around the earth, or in an earth orbit.
But that would mean anybody moving between two Earth orbits is not orbiting the Earth.
Arguably they were when they orbited the moon again, but actually they were in a moon orbit rather than an earth one.
They orbited the Moon which was orbiting the Earth.
-
But that would mean anybody moving between two Earth orbits is not orbiting the Earth.
They orbited the Moon which was orbiting the Earth.
That's right. A meteor travelling in a straight line from one point to another ,isn't in an orbit.
The astronauts going to the moon would have travelled in a path that wasn't in an earth orbit, to get there.
-
https://airandspace.si.edu/exhibitions/apollo-to-the-moon/online/apollo-11/getting-to-the-moon.cfm
They navigated using the stars.
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20121213-seven-steps-to-another-giant-leap
It's the bit where they leave the earth orbit and travel to the moon ( and then take up an orbit around the moon)
It's dangerous because they are no longer in an orbit.
So they had to get their figures right, or wind up lost in space.
You don't get lost if you stay in an orbit.
-
Really? Did you see all the training that Tim Peake had to do? Also, getting in to orbit requires you to strap yourself to a massive bomb and hope that it doesn't blow up all at once. Getting out of orbit requires you to sit in a tin can that is heated up to several thousand degrees C and then hope that the parachutes haven't been fried.
I do not begrudge him the title of astronaut.
I do not begrudge him but I am underwhelmed.
I would go into orbit as I suspect a great many people would.
It does not take much and we should be going much further.
-
"should" ?
-
"should" ?
Yes Should after all this time.
We are not making sufficient progress in my opinion.
I doubt we could land on the moon.
-
I too do not begrudge him the title "Astronaut" but admit to not seeing the point of it all. It costs a great deal of money which could be better spent elsewhere. Just my opinion. Plus it is dangerous. He's a family man.
I suppose Britain, or UK, feel they are in some sort of competition with the USA and Russia but why?
-
Yes Should after all this time.
We are not making sufficient progress in my opinion.
I doubt we could land on the moon.
Why aren't we progressing sufficiently, BR?
Is space travel only for the purpose of exploring other planets, or does and should it have as much or more value for imformation on the human body and the development of new medicines, scientific theories, etc?
-
Why aren't we progressing sufficiently, BR?
Is space travel only for the purpose of exploring other planets, or does and should it have as much or more value for imformation on the human body and the development of new medicines, scientific theories, etc?
Need to get to Mars.
That is good measure of success.
We must have enough other information by now, it not we are incredibly dim.
We have people in orbit 365 days of the year. It's all quite dull.
Getting to Mars is difficult, challenging and I think we should do it.
I am not interested in the next person going into orbit. We have been doing this for decades.
Equally, I want a fusion reactor please on stream delivery cheap clean electricity (too cheap to meter)
-
Need to get to Mars.
That is good measure of success.
We must have enough other information by now, it not we are incredibly dim.
We have people in orbit 365 days of the year. It's all quite dull.
Getting to Mars is difficult, challenging and I think we should do it.
I am not interested in the next person going into orbit. We have been doing this for decades.
Equally, I want a fusion reactor please on stream delivery cheap clean electricity (too cheap to meter)
When I read that BR I see you in a completely different light........... Someone else deprived of a career as a space commander, silver poloneck shirt and jumpsuit, Hovercar and House on stilts.
-
When I read that BR I see you in a completely different light........... Someone else deprived of a career as a space commander, silver poloneck shirt and jumpsuit, Hovercar and House on stilts.
And of course where's my jetpack
-
And of course where's my jetpack
Yes............... disappointed in all respects. Do you think we could get compensation for shattered expectations?
-
And of course where's my jetpack
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3139277/Finally-World-s-consumer-jetpack-sale-year-warned-set-150-000.html
-
I too do not begrudge him the title "Astronaut" but admit to not seeing the point of it all. It costs a great deal of money which could be better spent elsewhere. Just my opinion. Plus it is dangerous. He's a family man.
I suppose Britain, or UK, feel they are in some sort of competition with the USA and Russia but why?
Being a family anything is no reason not to do something dangerous.
-
Need to get to Mars.
That is good measure of success.
We must have enough other information by now, it not we are incredibly dim.
We have people in orbit 365 days of the year. It's all quite dull.
Getting to Mars is difficult, challenging and I think we should do it.
I am not interested in the next person going into orbit. We have been doing this for decades.
Equally, I want a fusion reactor please on stream delivery cheap clean electricity (too cheap to meter)
Before they set out to Mars they need to sort out the issue of the body losing bone and muscle..
Apparently it could be a big problem on a long journey like Mars.
They are trying to find out how big a problem it is going to be.
It would be tragic for the astronauts if they couldn't return to Earth after a successful mission.
I think getting to Mars is very important for the human race, but there are some issues that need sorting first.
We owe that to the ones who would be going.
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/ast01oct_1/
-
That's right. A meteor travelling in a straight line from one point to another ,isn't in an orbit.
Meteor's don't travel in straight lines when they are under the influence of Earth's gravity.
Or alternately, in General Relativity, they do, but then an orbit is also a straight line.
-
I too do not begrudge him the title "Astronaut" but admit to not seeing the point of it all. It costs a great deal of money which could be better spent elsewhere. Just my opinion. Plus it is dangerous. He's a family man.
The death of the human spirit.
-
It would be tragic for the astronauts if they couldn't return to Earth after a successful mission.
I think there would be plenty of volunteers for a mission that meant almost certain death. Even so, there has to be a good probability of getting there alive. Dying on the way there is a tragic failure. Dying on the way back is a heroic sacrifice in the pursuit of human knowledge.
-
I think there would be plenty of volunteers for a mission that meant almost certain death. Even so, there has to be a good probability of getting there alive. Dying on the way there is a tragic failure. Dying on the way back is a heroic sacrifice in the pursuit of human knowledge.
Amazingly you are probably right, it never fails to amaze me what people are prepared to do.
-
Meteor's don't travel in straight lines when they are under the influence of Earth's gravity.
Or alternately, in General Relativity, they do, but then an orbit is also a straight line.
That doesn't make much sense to me as orbits are normally curved and go round what they are orbiting
However, that said, I have found this
http://www.space.com/26572-how-it-worked-the-apollo-spacecraft-infographic.html
Which shows the path taken by Apollo to reach the moon.
I think that supports what you are saying more.
I had imagined them orbiting the Earth then leaving that orbit to reach the moon ( in a straight line).
This shows an elliptical orbit though.
-
If anyone is interested there is a programme tonight on BBC 4 horizon at 21.00 horizon on the Apollo landings and the future of space travel with James Burke
A bit old though 💐
🌹🌝
-
Being a family anything is no reason not to do something dangerous.
Good point Rhiannon, many parents do dangerous jobs every day. I just can't see the point of sending people into space when there is enough to do here. Yeah I'm bah humbug :).
-
The Independent refers to Major Tim Peake as Britain's first Proper astronaut but has the generally secular humanist rag fit only for wiping your arse with got it right?
Only you could manage to mention secularism and humanism in a post about a British Astronaut (and that's meant as a compliment!).
-
I smiled at the description of the Independent, being a "secular and humanist rag". That has nothing to do with astronauts but as it was mentioned, I have never thought of that newspaper in that way. Admittedly it is a long time since I purchased it but I have read it a few times and found it rather bland.