Of course you didn't mention say how the irrecoverable Soyuz failures happened only at the very start, and in a situation of political pressures (in Soviet Union, by Soviet leadership...) to rush the program.
Though "dickish words / actions" political image on the international stage means there's not that many of really benevolent allies left. And doesn't phallic imagery of rocket fits nicely into such trend?;p
(BTW, the main showstopper for asteroid mining is that we don't have the technology & energy sources to make it viable; now, here's the best part: if you do have them, you don't really need to mine asteroids anyway, you have everything on Earth...only easier. And weaponization boils down to having a rocket capable of launching millions of ball bearings into orbit and triggering Kessler Syndrome...)
Well - TBH, they certeinly can do one more flight rather easily. After all, the last (till now) Shuttle flight was supposed to have a "ready for launch" backup. So NASA will just use the readiness of the backup.
Does Transport Cargo Space System sound acceptable? Maybe even in this decade... (maybe - they are always notoriously underfunded; but Mir 3, probably in '20s, and supposedly with its main role of a "space drydock", should find such tug useful)
Don't be too suprised if the next mission beyond LEO will be essentially a private one.
Those are people responsible for every independently financed human spaceflight to date (excluding the first one, to Mir around 1990, IIRC) - now, consider they are not only relying on proven record of manufacturer of Soyuz (a spacecraft which was the first to carry large biological payload beyond LEO; we have few decades of experience with it; andit's still essentially capable of beyond - LEO operation), but also that Lunniy Korabl lander actually reached the status of flightworthy qualification.
Oh, they can just recertify the stuff they have for "one more flight" - lots of parts already were... (past scheduled replacement times, but allowed to fly under the condition of "not more than in X missions")
However unlikely the presence would be - culturing AF to check wouldn't have to give a clear answer, many / most microorganisms simply can't be cultured (that certainly includes most of gut flora)
But pracitcally all humans have parasites which are "doing something bad" (just generally kept in check); sure, flora/fauna might differ between two random humans, but we all have them - and some are quite common, one species of brain parasite in up to 1/3rd of humans, 80%, close to half probably, again 50%, 20%, and there's plenty more hovering around 10. Plus there seems to be a small core of bacterial gut flora virtually shared between all humans.
TFA certainly wasn't talking about "just one species" of given parasite/etc.
Generally being part of bodyplan in primitive chordates and earlier - at one point the bodies of our distant ancestors had roughly a form of tube after all, more or less. All those 3 functions (well, or 2; not much of an excretory system yet) were of "output" type (yes, also reproductive; fertilization was external after all), hence on the rear end; and it was carried over (not like it doesn't work now)
Why did you have to ask / schools at your place ignored basics of it?
Well, yeah, it had half of future genome...and who knows which way it would go. In such state it's a bit outside of the "problem" - sure, you have germ cells which aren't chicken...but once they come to be it, you get (at the same moment) both chicken egg and...chicken (embryo). Hence it's moot.
"Floppy" -> "strong" egg couldn't be a completelly rapid overhaul anyway, embryos would have to adapt, too; and not very defining feature.
It's all moot anyway. Any egg "from" which there would be chicken...obviously already has a chicken inside; certainly as far as genetic code / set of characteristics goes. It's chickens all the way down.
If that wasn't enough, this case just tries to describe how an eggshell typical of chickens came to be. If one were to accept that the original "big question" is "philosophical" at the least, then it surely isn't just about chickens - what about eggs of fish or amphibians? Leathery shells?
It doesn't even have much to do with the "big question."
At least 10 times more cells, when counting only gut bacteria (10^14 vs. 10^13 human ones in the body); also, "It is estimated that these gut flora have around 100 times as many genes in aggregate as there are in the human genome."
Archamoebae, not at all archaic eukaryotes, don't have mitochondria.
Anyway, not sure why you are hung up on mtichondria so much, it seems mostly as a 'BTW" of above poster - counting bacteria is apparently enough to arrive at higher numbers. Those which live "just" in our skin are very important, too - they compete with more "nasty" ones, keeping their numbers in check, as you mentioned...which means they DO (contrary to what you say just sentence before) interact in a beneficial way with skin or immune system
Intestinal payload also differs between humans. So does "human" DNA. And "actively controlled and purged on cellular level by our immune system" is probably a bit too one-dimensional way of looking at them, considering you'd be dead fairly quickly if you were to lose your bacterial flora.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, it's coming.
Hence we have ISS to train just for that. Add:
a) some module with a radiation shelter not only inside water storage, but also basically inside fuel and oxidizer tanks
b) have two parts, connected and spinning when en route and in Mars orbit ...and you're good to go.
Vast majority of our spacecraft are unmanned since the very beginning, so I'm not sure what are you proposing there...
Interesting what kinds of people are receptive to efforts of maintaining crashing business models?
Of course you didn't mention say how the irrecoverable Soyuz failures happened only at the very start, and in a situation of political pressures (in Soviet Union, by Soviet leadership...) to rush the program.
And the moral demise of youth will surely destroy civilisation very quickly... (we have written statements of that since Ancient Greece)
Not intristic; if voters actually care what happens to the country in the long term, then "whoring" for that will also happen.
It's all a refelction of the society.
King, btw, only has an incentive to keep his dynasty from being overturned; that doesn't directly go towards "in fairly decent order."
Though "dickish words / actions" political image on the international stage means there's not that many of really benevolent allies left. And doesn't phallic imagery of rocket fits nicely into such trend? ;p
(BTW, the main showstopper for asteroid mining is that we don't have the technology & energy sources to make it viable; now, here's the best part: if you do have them, you don't really need to mine asteroids anyway, you have everything on Earth...only easier. And weaponization boils down to having a rocket capable of launching millions of ball bearings into orbit and triggering Kessler Syndrome...)
Well - TBH, they certeinly can do one more flight rather easily. After all, the last (till now) Shuttle flight was supposed to have a "ready for launch" backup. So NASA will just use the readiness of the backup.
Does Transport Cargo Space System sound acceptable? Maybe even in this decade... (maybe - they are always notoriously underfunded; but Mir 3, probably in '20s, and supposedly with its main role of a "space drydock", should find such tug useful)
Sticking to bad ideas / wishes / endavours, merits be damned, doesn't end up fine for us; anywhere.
Don't be too suprised if the next mission beyond LEO will be essentially a private one.
Those are people responsible for every independently financed human spaceflight to date (excluding the first one, to Mir around 1990, IIRC) - now, consider they are not only relying on proven record of manufacturer of Soyuz (a spacecraft which was the first to carry large biological payload beyond LEO; we have few decades of experience with it; andit's still essentially capable of beyond - LEO operation), but also that Lunniy Korabl lander actually reached the status of flightworthy qualification.
Oh, they can just recertify the stuff they have for "one more flight" - lots of parts already were... (past scheduled replacement times, but allowed to fly under the condition of "not more than in X missions")
I'm sure it will be all fine.
Automatic recognition, on a wide scale / network, of young females, in Japan? Oh my...
And if that wasn't enough, also staring at you; in anitcipation...
Oh c'mon, you should give some hint instead of cleanly falling into Poe's Law.
However unlikely the presence would be - culturing AF to check wouldn't have to give a clear answer, many / most microorganisms simply can't be cultured (that certainly includes most of gut flora)
But pracitcally all humans have parasites which are "doing something bad" (just generally kept in check); sure, flora/fauna might differ between two random humans, but we all have them - and some are quite common, one species of brain parasite in up to 1/3rd of humans, 80%, close to half probably, again 50%, 20%, and there's plenty more hovering around 10. Plus there seems to be a small core of bacterial gut flora virtually shared between all humans.
TFA certainly wasn't talking about "just one species" of given parasite/etc.
Though for half of humanity that's not strictly a backup; more a case of diversity.
Apart from cloaca, also things like: ;) ) ;p But if it is, it's one of earliest examples possible)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterostome (yes, we start with anus and take everything from there
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vernanimalcula (if that's even a fossil
Generally being part of bodyplan in primitive chordates and earlier - at one point the bodies of our distant ancestors had roughly a form of tube after all, more or less. All those 3 functions (well, or 2; not much of an excretory system yet) were of "output" type (yes, also reproductive; fertilization was external after all), hence on the rear end; and it was carried over (not like it doesn't work now)
Why did you have to ask / schools at your place ignored basics of it?
Well, yeah, it had half of future genome...and who knows which way it would go. In such state it's a bit outside of the "problem" - sure, you have germ cells which aren't chicken...but once they come to be it, you get (at the same moment) both chicken egg and...chicken (embryo). Hence it's moot.
"Floppy" -> "strong" egg couldn't be a completelly rapid overhaul anyway, embryos would have to adapt, too; and not very defining feature.
It's all moot anyway. Any egg "from" which there would be chicken...obviously already has a chicken inside; certainly as far as genetic code / set of characteristics goes. It's chickens all the way down.
If that wasn't enough, this case just tries to describe how an eggshell typical of chickens came to be. If one were to accept that the original "big question" is "philosophical" at the least, then it surely isn't just about chickens - what about eggs of fish or amphibians? Leathery shells?
It doesn't even have much to do with the "big question."
Ehhh...fine, then "inert" is cleary not appropriate, happy?
And c'mon, very quick & easy search brings two sources of very nice, solid references (also journals)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_flora
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gut_flora
At least 10 times more cells, when counting only gut bacteria (10^14 vs. 10^13 human ones in the body); also, "It is estimated that these gut flora have around 100 times as many genes in aggregate as there are in the human genome."
Do you have any more ridiculous problems?
Archamoebae, not at all archaic eukaryotes, don't have mitochondria.
Anyway, not sure why you are hung up on mtichondria so much, it seems mostly as a 'BTW" of above poster - counting bacteria is apparently enough to arrive at higher numbers. Those which live "just" in our skin are very important, too - they compete with more "nasty" ones, keeping their numbers in check, as you mentioned...which means they DO (contrary to what you say just sentence before) interact in a beneficial way with skin or immune system
Intestinal payload also differs between humans. So does "human" DNA. And "actively controlled and purged on cellular level by our immune system" is probably a bit too one-dimensional way of looking at them, considering you'd be dead fairly quickly if you were to lose your bacterial flora.