It would be more accurate to say that Saturn technology was based on Nazi technology. But the German technology was based on American technology, specifically Goddard's.
Well...CO2 is not really "dirty" as far as plants and animals are concerned, at least, not at anything remotely like atmospheric levels. If global warming is in fact not as big a concern as believed, then reducing atmospheric CO2 has at best almost no beneficial impact on air quality, and in fact to the extent that CO2 mitigation takes priority to other air quality priorities, like sulfur and nitrogen oxides, it actually decreases air quality.
I highly doubt this vehicle is intended to be weaponized. You would still need a ridiculous number of them to provide 1 hr strike capability to anyplace on Earth. There are just so many practical problem with using an orbital platform that way, when ship- or aircraft-launched cruise missiles - or ballistic missiles, for that matter - can do the job about as well for a lot less money.
Far more likely, I think, is an advanced orbital surveillance drone, with enough manuevering capability to frequently change orbit to monitor changing sites of interest, and, when low on propelland, be able to land, refuel, and take off again. This would (1) reduce the number of spy sats needed (which typically have limited manuevering), (2) allow frequent upgrades to observation abilities whenever it landed, and (3) make it much, much harder to predict when overfly will be, increasing the probaility of seeing something interesting.
It's worth noting, too, that while they launched off of government property, SpaceX did in fact construct all of the pad infrastructure at their own expense. (They did get some help, from, e.g., the Air Force agreeing to sell them a scrapped 110,000 gallon LOX sphere for $1.)
No rockets use oxygen from the air even during the first stage; it's simply not concentrated enough even at sea level. What you're describing is something like a ramjet or scramjet, but those are still in active development and don't work at all at low take-off speeds.
And yet, even though the federal goverment is actually collecting quite a bit more than it did back in the golden nineties, we still have this massive deficit! How could this be?
Federal Outlays (in constant Fy2005 Dollars): 1999 : 1,701.8 Billion 2010 : 3,456.2 Billion
Oh.
But yeah, the government isn't collecting enough money, that's the problem for sure.
Well, an alternate scenario is that the file name is an arbitrary piece of metadata, as is the program to use the file with. So, you have a piece of metadata that says "Open this file with Notepad" and it will open with Notepad regardless of what the name is.
The main disadvantage of this (and one of the reasons it's being deprecated somewhat in OSX) is that while filesystem support for file names is universal, but support for creator code metadata is not. So shifting files across different platforms is much simpler when the metadata is embedded in the filename, e.g., as an extension.
You're reversing cause and effect. A volume isn't boot because it's C:\, it's assigned C:\ because it's boot. Behind the scenes the drive letters don't exist. It's an abstraction, in a similar way that sda, sdb, sdc are.
I don't understand what is so complicated about the registry. It's essentially a database of key/value pairs with an API. While, like anything else, it can be made to fail, if you believe that it is almost always a huge mess of errors that are slowing down your system, you're might just a gullible sap who believes the marketing of snake-oil software makers.
Slashdot Mirror
I think Bigby was referring obliquely to the kind of "manufactured homes" that seem to attract tornados at an alarming rate.
It would be more accurate to say that Saturn technology was based on Nazi technology. But the German technology was based on American technology, specifically Goddard's.
as far as I know, to date not one single private vehicle has reached orbit except by riding a government-designed rocket.
Dragon is a private space vehicle and rides on Falcon 9, a privately designed and operated rocket.
Well...CO2 is not really "dirty" as far as plants and animals are concerned, at least, not at anything remotely like atmospheric levels. If global warming is in fact not as big a concern as believed, then reducing atmospheric CO2 has at best almost no beneficial impact on air quality, and in fact to the extent that CO2 mitigation takes priority to other air quality priorities, like sulfur and nitrogen oxides, it actually decreases air quality.
Yes, but NASA doesn't actually do either of those things.
It's the latter that enables the former.
You're like the person who decides to stop sleeping, because they'd rather be getting productive work done.
I highly doubt this vehicle is intended to be weaponized. You would still need a ridiculous number of them to provide 1 hr strike capability to anyplace on Earth. There are just so many practical problem with using an orbital platform that way, when ship- or aircraft-launched cruise missiles - or ballistic missiles, for that matter - can do the job about as well for a lot less money.
Far more likely, I think, is an advanced orbital surveillance drone, with enough manuevering capability to frequently change orbit to monitor changing sites of interest, and, when low on propelland, be able to land, refuel, and take off again. This would (1) reduce the number of spy sats needed (which typically have limited manuevering), (2) allow frequent upgrades to observation abilities whenever it landed, and (3) make it much, much harder to predict when overfly will be, increasing the probaility of seeing something interesting.
Re-Enter The Dragon
It's worth noting, too, that while they launched off of government property, SpaceX did in fact construct all of the pad infrastructure at their own expense. (They did get some help, from, e.g., the Air Force agreeing to sell them a scrapped 110,000 gallon LOX sphere for $1.)
I believe it is a roll control thruster that operates off of stage vent gas.
No rockets use oxygen from the air even during the first stage; it's simply not concentrated enough even at sea level. What you're describing is something like a ramjet or scramjet, but those are still in active development and don't work at all at low take-off speeds.
So the name *itself* is not offensive, it only reminds him of hateful, offensive people that have hurt him and the people he loves.
When it comes to public acceptance, it's a distinction without a practical difference.
Dragon was designed to be able to land on Earth using retros alone. Mars, at 1/6 G, should then be no problem for a 100% retro landing.
My voice is my passport. Verify me.
They specifically said in TFA that the difference was the prevalence of harmonics, which should be easily measured with a scope.
With sufficient energy you might as well use the H and atmospheric CO2 to synthesize methane, which is a lot easier to work with than H2.
Meh, it's basically how lots of finely ground sausages are made. You've never had wiesswurst? Or leberkase? Or hot dogs or spam?
Federal Receipts (in constant FY2005 Dollars):
1999 : 1,827.50 Billion
2010 : 2,162.7 Billion
Hmmm, that's interesting, we're actually collecting significantly more money now than we were during the nineties era of higher tax rates...
Budget Surplus/Deficit (in constant FY2005 Dollars):
1999 : 125.6 Billion surplus
2010 : -1,293.5 Billion deficit
And yet, even though the federal goverment is actually collecting quite a bit more than it did back in the golden nineties, we still have this massive deficit! How could this be?
Federal Outlays (in constant Fy2005 Dollars):
1999 : 1,701.8 Billion
2010 : 3,456.2 Billion
Oh.
But yeah, the government isn't collecting enough money, that's the problem for sure.
1. It's optional.
2. Yes, they do want to hook young programmers.
3. It's essentially a tech demo for the VS plugin system, not a new core feature.
Well, an alternate scenario is that the file name is an arbitrary piece of metadata, as is the program to use the file with. So, you have a piece of metadata that says "Open this file with Notepad" and it will open with Notepad regardless of what the name is.
The main disadvantage of this (and one of the reasons it's being deprecated somewhat in OSX) is that while filesystem support for file names is universal, but support for creator code metadata is not. So shifting files across different platforms is much simpler when the metadata is embedded in the filename, e.g., as an extension.
Because ultimately it's arbitrary. There's no real upside to changing it and a lot of potential downside.
You're reversing cause and effect. A volume isn't boot because it's C:\, it's assigned C:\ because it's boot. Behind the scenes the drive letters don't exist. It's an abstraction, in a similar way that sda, sdb, sdc are.
Well, it's got checksumming, which is a pretty significant feature for some usage scenarios. Also, NTFS is certainly not going away.
I don't understand what is so complicated about the registry. It's essentially a database of key/value pairs with an API. While, like anything else, it can be made to fail, if you believe that it is almost always a huge mess of errors that are slowing down your system, you're might just a gullible sap who believes the marketing of snake-oil software makers.
By inserting itself into the ISO image before you burned it.