Post
Fri Sep 15, 2017 3:52 am
#226
Re: Rocket Lunches
Cassini is on final approach - adios, Cassini!
Oolite Naval Attaché
I'd be interested in hearing you elaborate.Flatfingers wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2017 3:11 pmI have some problems with this attitude, but it's an explanation worth knowing.
Talvieno wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2017 3:18 pmI'd be interested in hearing you elaborate.Flatfingers wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2017 3:11 pmI have some problems with this attitude, but it's an explanation worth knowing.
i dont know about you but i prefer not accidentally damaging something we dont know, cant repair and cant replicate over keeping something that we built in the first place and that has purely sentimental value to us at that point.Flatfingers wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2017 3:38 pmTalvieno wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2017 3:18 pmI'd be interested in hearing you elaborate.Flatfingers wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2017 3:11 pmI have some problems with this attitude, but it's an explanation worth knowing.
Nothing cray-cray; I just don't want physical (especially human) exploration of other worlds discouraged by an unnecessary view of human activity as "contaminating" other places in the Solar System that might -- might -- harbor life.
I'm sympathetic to the pure science argument that if non-terrestrial life exists, it's desirable to study it before risking the introduction of terrestrial life. That's reasonable, up to a point. But I am not sympathetic to any hint of an anti-human-activity argument: "we destroy all we touch" sort of thing.
Basically, I oppose any argument that would hold us back from going out there ourselves to see what's what.
Also, I note that the full mission to Saturn's neighborhood was actually Cassini-Huygens: the ESA dropped the Huygens probe on Titan in 2005, for heaven's sake. I think it's safe to say we've already "contaminated" that corner of our neighborhood.
Let's go find out what happened next.
This is not correct in general; e.g. geostationary orbits around Earth are fairly stable; but it is indeed correct for a complex system such as Saturn, especially where Cassini was.Flatfingers wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2017 3:55 pmMy naive understanding is that there's really no such thing as a parking orbit for a small satellite.
Planetary protection is a scientifically valid argument.Flatfingers wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2017 3:38 pmI'm sympathetic to the pure science argument that if non-terrestrial life exists, it's desirable to study it before risking the introduction of terrestrial life. That's reasonable, up to a point. But I am not sympathetic to any hint of an anti-human-activity argument: "we destroy all we touch" sort of thing.
Also, I note that the full mission to Saturn's neighborhood was actually Cassini-Huygens: the ESA dropped the Huygens probe on Titan in 2005, for heaven's sake. I think it's safe to say we've already "contaminated" that corner of our neighborhood.
outlander wrote: ↑Sat Sep 16, 2017 6:09 amThis is not correct in general; e.g. geostationary orbits around Earth are fairly stable; but it is indeed correct for a complex system such as Saturn, especially where Cassini was.Flatfingers wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2017 3:55 pmMy naive understanding is that there's really no such thing as a parking orbit for a small satellite.
outlander wrote: ↑Sat Sep 16, 2017 6:09 amThere are, however, other moons in Saturn system with conditions much more similar to our own planet - namely, Enceladus, which is the first moon for which we got a direct confirmation of the existence of a water ocean beneath the crust. And Cassini's orbit lies dangerously close to it - in fact, it's because we changed it to allow closer passes on Enceladus to sample water that geysers spew out
It wasnt a joke.Flatfingers wrote: ↑Sat Sep 16, 2017 11:38 am??? You're claiming that the proximity of an infinitesimally tiny spacecraft (Cassini) to Enceladus caused the jets of water vapor that were imaged as Cassini approached this moon of Saturn?
Please tell me this was a joke.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 50 guests