Jump to content

🐍 Official visual for Dorian Electra's remix of "Replay" 🐍

science

NASA awards Musk's SpaceX $178M contract for Jupiter Moon mission


Featured Posts

Teletubby

NASA has awarded Elon Musk's private rocket company SpaceX a $178 million contract to launch a spacecraft to Jupiter's moon Europa.

The NASA mission, known as Europa Clipper, will blast off in October 2024 with the help of Musk's company Space Exploration Technologies Corp.

The Europa Clipper is designed to fly past Jupiter's moon Europa 45 times.

It will be NASA's first mission to Europa, Jupiter's fourth largest moon. 

According to NASA, The Europa Clipper spacecraft will produce high-resolution images of the surface, determine the moon's composition, and scan for geologic activity.

source

  • Like 6
  • YAAAS 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
CannaeDrive
9 minutes ago, Eido said:

Shouldn't we focus on mars ? 

There's always been multiple parallel projects going on at NASA.

Algorithm, the beat.
Link to post
Share on other sites
sarahb
19 hours ago, Eido said:

Shouldn't we focus on mars ? 

Pretty sure Europa has a higher chance for finding life

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
judaspriest
4 minutes ago, sarahb said:

That's not NASA's job

Yep, NASA's job is stuff that serves no real purpose other than giving the rich a ten-minute travel, apparently.

Their question was also "shouldn't we focus on...?" not "shoudn't NASA", and we, humankind, definetly shouldn't focus on spending resources on rich a-holes' exercises in arrogance.

Edited by Will Graham
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
sarahb
1 minute ago, Will Graham said:

Yep, NASA's job is stuff that serves no real purpose other than giving the rich a ten-minute travel, apparently.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure NASA hasn't had anything to do with that. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
judaspriest
2 minutes ago, sarahb said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure NASA hasn't had anything to do with that. 

You're not wrong at all, NASA has nothing to do with actually benefiting mankind, they're just there so Elon can play with his little rockets lol

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Reginald
51 minutes ago, Will Graham said:

You're not wrong at all, NASA has nothing to do with actually benefiting mankind, they're just there so Elon can play with his little rockets lol

Strongly disagree. Just because Bezos and Musk are currently trying to use their money as leverage doesn't mean that space exploration isn't beneficial to mankind :shrug: There's enough money for everything, the government just doesn't allocate it properly.

And lol NASA is grossly underfunded anyway, which is why Bezos and Musk are able to pull this BS. Space exploration gets fed the equivalent of pennies out of the government's budget  

Taking an extended break from GGD. Ttyl.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Economy
1 hour ago, Will Graham said:

Yep, NASA's job is stuff that serves no real purpose other than giving the rich a ten-minute travel, apparently.

Their question was also "shouldn't we focus on...?" not "shoudn't NASA", and we, humankind, definetly shouldn't focus on spending resources on rich a-holes' exercises in arrogance.

At least we learn about the Universe and what we learn about physics could potentially in the future also serve practicle applications

 

Id say its still more useful than bloaded military budgets. Now theres real useless wasted resources

  • YAAAS 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
JohnWayne92

Jesus Christ people really hate NASA for no reason here

I hope we find sustainable living elsewhere, the earth is ****ed because of us. The bigger picture, we have ruined our planet, we suck as a species and maybe in the future we could get this right somewhere else because we squandered it here. 
 

Like someone said previously, the money and resources to fix the world are already here, we just don’t. Money is a goddamn illusion anyway, it’s a number on a screen. Our money lost value the moment it became printed and not actual gold and what not. 
 

What about every other multimillion dollar industry? The other multi billion dollar industries? But no…ew NASA…

How was McDonalds this week? How was Walmart? Netflix? When’s the last time they did Jack **** to help? I’ll wait. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Economy
7 minutes ago, JohnWayne92 said:

Jesus Christ people really hate NASA for no reason here

I hope we find sustainable living elsewhere, the earth is ****ed because of us. The bigger picture, we have ruined our planet, we suck as a species and maybe in the future we could get this right somewhere else because we squandered it here. 
 

Like someone said previously, the money and resources to fix the world are already here, we just don’t. Money is a goddamn illusion anyway, it’s a number on a screen. Our money lost value the moment it became printed and not actual gold and what not. 
 

What about every other multimillion dollar industry? The other multi billion dollar industries? But no…ew NASA…

How was McDonalds this week? How was Walmart? Netflix? When’s the last time they did Jack **** to help? I’ll wait. 

Honestly i never understood that idea at all that if earth got screwed of going somewhere else... the odds of finding a near carbon copy of earth within several light years is exeptionally low...

 

If our technology got advanced enough to terraform or adjust a suitable planet to make it livable for ourselves it should be even easier to fix a planet (Earth) that already has the perfect gravity for us, distance from sun, day cycle etc...

 

Those base factors dont change becaùse of global warming so it would be a matter of reversing damage. Any new planet wed find that came even remotely close to be able to sustain life would still have different parameters wed have to adapt to that would make it more difficult to live there

 

So again, if we get advanced enough to settle and thrive on a far away alien world, theres no reason we shouldnt be able to fix our own planet because that would be easier

 

Unless u found a planet that was just THAT simmilar to Earth undamaged but honestly the odds of that are extremely slim. In all likelyhood the closest we find to Earth is still going to have meaningful differences

Link to post
Share on other sites
judaspriest
2 hours ago, JohnWayne92 said:

Jesus Christ people really hate NASA for no reason here

I hope we find sustainable living elsewhere, the earth is ****ed because of us. The bigger picture, we have ruined our planet, we suck as a species and maybe in the future we could get this right somewhere else because we squandered it here. 
 

Like someone said previously, the money and resources to fix the world are already here, we just don’t. Money is a goddamn illusion anyway, it’s a number on a screen. Our money lost value the moment it became printed and not actual gold and what not. 
 

What about every other multimillion dollar industry? The other multi billion dollar industries? But no…ew NASA…

How was McDonalds this week? How was Walmart? Netflix? When’s the last time they did Jack **** to help? I’ll wait. 

 

2 hours ago, Economy said:

Honestly i never understood that idea at all that if earth got screwed of going somewhere else... the odds of finding a near carbon copy of earth within several light years is exeptionally low...

 

If our technology got advanced enough to terraform or adjust a suitable planet to make it livable for ourselves it should be even easier to fix a planet (Earth) that already has the perfect gravity for us, distance from sun, day cycle etc...

 

Those base factors dont change becaùse of global warming so it would be a matter of reversing damage. Any new planet wed find that came even remotely close to be able to sustain life would still have different parameters wed have to adapt to that would make it more difficult to live there

 

So again, if we get advanced enough to settle and thrive on a far away alien world, theres no reason we shouldnt be able to fix our own planet because that would be easier

 

Unless u found a planet that was just THAT simmilar to Earth undamaged but honestly the odds of that are extremely slim. In all likelyhood the closest we find to Earth is still going to have meaningful differences

There is no such place as a planet with sustainable conditions out there, this is all we'll ever get so we better treat Earth with a little more care

Edited by Will Graham
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Debithius
25 minutes ago, Will Graham said:

 

There is no such place as a planet with sustainable conditions out there, this is all we'll ever get so we better treat Earth with a little more care

Now that's definitely not true in the slightest. There are but they are too far away for us to reach in time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...