SpaceX successfully launches Falcon Heavy rocket for the first time

By Shawn Knight · 196 replies
Feb 6, 2018
Post New Reply
  1. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 13,419   +2,982

    Recently, all you've been contributing, is your opinion, of my opinion. Which given the fact you despise my opinion and me, seems counterproductive and possibly emotionally injurious to yourself..:oops: Even I might fairly say, that's loving the sound of your own voice. And then there's that "all seeing eye" avatar. A lesser person than myself might see that as a trifle pompous.

    Strike out and do some good for yourself, and your fellow members, by whimpering about the high price of video cards. Don't do anything about it mind you, just join a good old fashioned, campfire cry along, in the key of E flat minor.

    Here, I'll write some lyrics for you:,"I Wah, Wah, Wah-nted a 1080, tee, But now I'm stuck here with Eye Gee Pee"

    Rock On with your "Bad-vok Self". (y)
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2018
  2. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 13,419   +2,982

    I think Musk also said, "maybe we could nuke Mars polar caps for water". Hey look, I'm sure radioactive water would be good for people, and after all, you don't know until you've tried it. Cheers!
     
    Boilerhog146 and wiyosaya like this.
  3. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 13,419   +2,982

    Good point! Are we really sure this launch was't faked, just like the Apollo moon landings?

    Disclaimer: The opinion expressed in the above post, is not necessarily that of "captaincranky", and may, or may not be, the opinion of another member.
     
  4. JaredTheDragon

    JaredTheDragon TS Maniac Posts: 349   +218

    First of all, everyone dies. Everyone.

    Second of all, Mars is too small to ever have a breathable atmosphere. Ever. It doesn't have enough mass charge to float oxygen or nitrogen, or Argon. Venus doesn't either. A planet must be the same radius and density as Earth to float a breathable atmosphere.

    That means at BEST, living in domes. But wait, Musk hasn't built any domes? So anyone he sends to Mars will just die in orbit, in the spacecraft. Fun, fun. What a great accomplishment that would be!
     
    Charles Olson likes this.
  5. JaredTheDragon

    JaredTheDragon TS Maniac Posts: 349   +218

    They've been caught using CGI all over the place already, from return booster "landings" where they simply reversed launch footage to fake video rendered in Maya of the ISS meet-ups.

    That said, I think it's likely that they launched this money-pit contraption, but there's no Tesla roadster on it and that's all just media hype. Even Musk wouldn't be allowed to just lob garbage off into space. He's a fake person, never done anything of worth or of note in his entire fake life, with fake marriages and fake children and a fake career. He's just a front-man, much like Jobs or Gates or Zucky.
     
  6. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 13,419   +2,982

    @JaredTheDragon You are aware that post will grant you a membership in my gang, "The Cranky Literary Lightning Rods".
     
  7. JaredTheDragon

    JaredTheDragon TS Maniac Posts: 349   +218

    For example, this image Techspot is using for their email campaign (but I couldn't find here in the article) is really bad CGI:

    https://www.techspot.com/images2/news/ts3_thumbs/2018/02/2018-02-05-ts3_thumbs-e32.jpg
    [​IMG]
    Why use terrible fake images if real ones exist? We see this all the time in the space race, from all nations. NASA in particular loves to push and promote CGI as reality. Don't get me wrong, I'm a CG professional and I don't mind decent CGI or related imagery, such as the Juno "pics" of Jupiter which aren't photos at all but still look cool.

    I just prefer the honest truth.
     
    wiyosaya likes this.
  8. Fobus

    Fobus TS Booster Posts: 83   +52

    And if they had done that, and if the rocket exploded, you'd be the first one cry about the horrible waste of millions or tens of millions of $, just like you did with your Zuma comments. You can't have it both ways


    Btw, you make a good propagandist. That righteous tone while talking about things you have no clue about...
     
    Charles Olson likes this.
  9. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 13,419   +2,982

    No, I think I said something on the order of, "they didn't have the ballz play with house money on telemetry equipment".

    And let's face it Musk was probably ready for a new Tesla anyway. He is after all, "the great and powerful Oz",or the CEO of a corporation posting hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars in losses, during the course of its existence,depending on your point of view Yet he's still a multi-billionaire. What's up with that?

    As for me "crying about wasted taxpayer dollars if, "Falcon Heavy" exploded", you're right, I probably would, at least as soon as my sinister, insane laughter, and cheering, died down.

    I would be interested to know if Musk intends to write the orbiting Tesla off his taxes, as a, "business expense", or an, "advertising expense". I know the taxpayers and/or Tesla shareholders will pay for it one way or another.
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2018
  10. JaredTheDragon

    JaredTheDragon TS Maniac Posts: 349   +218

    He's a fraud from top to bottom. They just assign value to him just like Zucky, despite having no profits and no products until very recently.

    Even his marriage is a fraud. Here's his first wife and their five children:

    [​IMG]
    From the Mathis expose':

    "I draw your attention to the three tricycles and two bikes. This is to remind us that Musk is supposed to have five sons by this woman. Not only do we get no photos of the children—which is perhaps understandable—she doesn't mention them once in the article, either by name or in any other way. Mostly she just repeats the story of Musk's rise to fame and fortune, with the occasional plug of her own. Very strange. I would have to say it is the most impersonal article of its kind I have ever read. No, beyond impersonal; it is chilly, almost chilling. It reads like it was put together by a committee, and it may have been. I say that because if we do a people search on Elon Musk, we find no evidence of these children in the computers. In fact, Intelius doesn't even have an Elon Musk listed in California. Only his father, Errol Musk. InstantCheckMate lists an Elon Musk related to Justine, but the only other relation is a Jennifer. Since Justine's middle initial is J., I assume Jennifer is also her. If these five boys have birth certificates, they should be in the computers. They aren't. "

    And further down:
    "Although Musk's companies have received 5 billion in government subsidies, Musk says he isn't in favor of government subsidies for companies like his. Instead he has come out in favor of a carbon tax. Obviously, he is just reading from the Teleprompter again there, and isn't concerned with appearing to be consistent. Fake people fronting fake companies don't have to worry about appearing consistent. It is all about stirring your mind into Musk, I mean Mush. The people behind Musk want all the subsidies they can drink, but then they want to pretend they don't lust for them like they do. They also don't want you to apply for any subsidies, because they don't need the competition. They don't want you to be subsidized; they want you to be taxed.

    So why do I think these companies are fake? We'll start with Musk's links to Mike Griffin. Griffin was head of NASA from 2005 to 2009, but on Musk's page we learn that Griffin also worked for In-Q-Tel, the venture capital arm of the CIA! That is probably the biggest red flag on the entire page. Curiously, that information has been scrubbed off Griffin's own page. What exactly is In-Q-Tel?

    '"In-Q-Tel invests in high-tech companies for the sole purpose of keeping the Central Intelligence Agency, and other intelligence agencies, equipped with the latest in information technology in support of United States intelligence capability."'

    That is the key to unlocking this whole mystery, so I suggest you read it several times, to let it sink in. I suggest that not only did In-Q-Tel “invest” in all of Musk's companies, it actually created them, and him. We know the CIA creates many front companies, since the mainstream admits it. But it is usually assumed they do this to facilitate domestic covert operations of various sorts. But we have tripped over much evidence companies are created for reasons even more fundamental to the American way. That is to say, a significant part of the US infrastructure is an illusion—an illusion created to facilitate a variety of treasury dips by the very wealthy. Actually, the mainstream press has already reported on a small part of these thefts and grafts. See, for example, Matt Taibbi's Rolling Stone reports on the big banks, especially this 2013 report entitled “Everything is Rigged”. However, even Taibbi has not yet seen that it is not only via rigging that the rich are becoming richer. It is also via manufacturing fake companies, fake portfolios, and fake projects, by which the treasury can be milked and bilked of billions of dollars of subsidies, grants, and other monies. "

    Griffin and Musk were in Russia in 2002, trying to buy old ICBMs to kick SpaceX off. Think about that. Who buys old ICBMs, from any nation, at any time? Do you believe Putin would just sell you an old rocket shell full of state secrets? Why would they sell a NASA guy AND some douchey Jewish "entrepreneur" state secrets at all, ever?

    They wouldn't, any more than the US would.
     
  11. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 2,460   +1,135

    And neither did I. He did say that a requirement to apply to be a Muskonaut was to be prepared to die. One of my other posts to this thread gives a link to a quote of what he said.

    Good luck on that living somewhere with the existing technology. As captain cranky said, he is not a scientist. The technology to build a successful habitat fit for off-world living is barely a theory at this point, especially if what is intended is to have an environment where food can be grown and harvested. Theories need testing in actual practice before they can be hardened for practical use. If a supply ship is necessary, any malfunctions with that will not help the survival chances in the least.
     
    Boilerhog146 and JaredTheDragon like this.
  12. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 2,460   +1,135

    Got that right about the atmosphere. On top of that, too, is the fact that it has no magnetic field - meaning it is subject to blasting by solar winds. Besides it being too small, part of the theory about why it lost its atmosphere is because it had no magnetic field to shield it from those winds.
     
    senketsu likes this.
  13. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 2,460   +1,135

    (y)
     
  14. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 13,419   +2,982

    Ya gotta hand it @Shawn Knight on this thread. So far he's gotten 62 replies to this thread, without one single accusation of, "click baiting"! (y)
     
    wiyosaya likes this.
  15. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 2,460   +1,135

    Knowing Musk, probably both. :confused:
     
    captaincranky likes this.
  16. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 13,419   +2,982

    But, but, but, I thought one piece of matter couldn't be in two places, or on one tax return in two places at the same time? :confused:

    And "Muskonaut" really? That sounds like a, "position", which would require knee pads, a gas mask, and a total lack of self respect....:eek: :oops:.
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2018
  17. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 2,460   +1,135

    I'm glad you are enjoying the entertainment. As I see it, some people just cannot tell the difference between a great meal and shoe leather. ;)
     
  18. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 2,460   +1,135

    @captaincranky Well, you and I both know that Musk thinks he is Doctor Who. :D
     
  19. JaredTheDragon

    JaredTheDragon TS Maniac Posts: 349   +218

    It never did have or could have an atmosphere, based on its radius and gravity alone. Our atmosphere, and any any every atmosphere, is a function of gravity opposed by the planet's outgoing charge (heat), which is why Oxygen, Argon, and Nitrogen persist and float for so long whereas CO2 is too heavy to float for very long. Oxygen is more in balance with the Earth's charge.

    Mars has charge as well, all matter is charged and emits photons, but Mars doesn't have enough charge to ever float anything but Hydrogen and Helium really. Venus has enough enough charge but not enough gravity, which is why CO2 persists so readily there. It wouldn't matter what you did to these planets, they could not float an oxygen atmosphere unless you increased their radius and density artificially, to equal the Earth's.

    And this is a huge conundrum for "exo-planets". It doesn't matter if it's in a sweet zone for solar heat, if the radius is wrong. It has to be so close to the Earth's radius that it's basically identical.
     
    wiyosaya likes this.
  20. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 2,460   +1,135

    You are I are on the same side of the Musk fence, for sure, and I get planets have a charge. It was a problem in Halliday and Resnick.

    Here is a link to recent research which, by analysis of an ancient meteorite that scientific consensus says came from Mars (by ancient, I mean on the order of 4-billion years old), says that Mars did have much more of an atmosphere than it does today. The article also states that after Mars lost its magnetic field, ionic stripping via the solar wind contributed to Mars current climate. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/10/171002114214.htm

    I think that it would not be much of a stretch to say that there is enough science available to come to the conclusion that Mars is still losing atmosphere and other elements that give it its present environment.

    These, of course, are not the sole factors. As you stated, planet size, and other factors, too, contribute to the environment of any planet anywhere.

    Certainly terraforming, as implied by your comments about oxygen, is something that is well beyond humanity's current technological capability, and the oxygen would be lost, anyway, no matter what humanity did to try to make it livable for humans.

    As I see it, about the only way that humanity could live there is in some sort of pressurized structure. Whether humanity possesses the technology and the means to construct a sizeable structure is highly questionable as I see it.

    There is so much else to contend with, at least in my mind, when considering humanity living on Mars. One of those things is that since there is no magnetic field to deflect solar winds, the radiation on the surface may be much higher than that on Earth. As I understand it, part of the reason we are able to survive here on Earth is because the Earth's magnetic field deflects enough of the charged particles (radiation for those that are unaware) that are present in the solar wind to make life livable for humanity.

    I think that we both agree that, at present, life on Mars will be no cakewalk.
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2018
    JaredTheDragon likes this.
  21. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 2,460   +1,135

    Well, since Musk was advertising for the position of astronaut, it seemed to fit those who are flocking to his feet. ;)
     
    JaredTheDragon likes this.
  22. JaredTheDragon

    JaredTheDragon TS Maniac Posts: 349   +218

    Indeed, Mars may very well have had a denser atmosphere at one time, but it would have been mostly Hydrogen and Helium. It's simply too small to float anything much larger. And as we know, Hydrogen is basically just protons, which the sun spits out constantly as well as electrons. It's kind of a stretch to call that an atmosphere, but I know what you meant.
     
    wiyosaya likes this.
  23. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 2,460   +1,135

    Having often found myself in situations where what I say can, and often does, stretch beyond the ken of others, it is always great to converse with someone that speaks from a basis in scientific knowledge rather than trying to BS their way through something about which they appear to know very little.
     
  24. Boilerhog146

    Boilerhog146 TS Evangelist Posts: 583   +198

    A job well done in any case.
    when he does get to fly off to the moon or mars ,he can stop and grab his roadster ,and be the only guy in space with a car.bragging rights. :p
    Then he's gonna look back and moon us all !
    Am I in the right place?
    this goes way beyond my Ken!
    seriously though, I doubt anyone is going to mars,for anything more than another stop base like the one they will put on the moon, another blue planet much like our own will most likely be discovered in the mean time ,,that is just a theory, much like any other .but seems more realistic.
    so much is known here about its atmosphere , you won't mind my asking if it spins on an axis like earth does , how fast,what sort of gravity does it have, can ya take some of that hydrogen, mix it with other gases and make breathable air or water.or Fuel,all of which will be a big necessity , to sustain life,

    mind if I hitch a ride,drop me off on venus, if its not too far out of the way,I know a girl there...
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2018
  25. Joe Blow

    Joe Blow TS Addict Posts: 216   +74

    More media fakery. As if the materials on the car would not be adversely affected by the harsh environment of space. As for the space suit, don't put a human in it. They'll be dead. Sorry, I'm not fooled.
     
    wiyosaya and JaredTheDragon like this.

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...