It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Trueman
a reply to: Christosterone
Finally NASA will stop wasting time and money, thanks to Trump.
originally posted by: LumenImagoDei
I don't think we have any business going to other planets if we can't even take care of our own.
originally posted by: Aazadan
Before any of that is seriously considered, we're going to have real space stations, and probably even automated comet mining.
I don't know what they really intend, or are covering up, but its not to live on moon or mars. Both are inhospitable to life.
originally posted by: Natas0114
a reply to: intrptr
Resources that can be mined and exploited for cash. Iridium, platinum, palladium, gold, helium 3 etc.....
using the ISS as a Transport ? from Earth Space to Moon Space ?
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: LumenImagoDei
I don't think we have any business going to other planets if we can't even take care of our own.
Our own sun is going to die.
So total extinction of humans is OK with you?
originally posted by: InachMarbank
I just started thinking about space program stuff pretty recently. Among other things, I can't seem to wrap my head around the gravitational intricacies of how satellites stay in orbit.
I have asked this kick off question before and run into a wall on a different site. Maybe the community here at ATS can help me see the light... Here goes...
What is the terminal velocity of an object falling in a vacuum?
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: LumenImagoDei
I don't think we have any business going to other planets if we can't even take care of our own.
Our own sun is going to die.
So total extinction of humans is OK with you?
The Sun won't die for another 5 billion years. Let's even move that up a bit, and say it has only 3 Billion years left...
originally posted by: Aazadan
originally posted by: InachMarbank
I just started thinking about space program stuff pretty recently. Among other things, I can't seem to wrap my head around the gravitational intricacies of how satellites stay in orbit.
I have asked this kick off question before and run into a wall on a different site. Maybe the community here at ATS can help me see the light... Here goes...
What is the terminal velocity of an object falling in a vacuum?
I'm no physicist so I could be wrong, but my understanding is that there isn't one. Terminal velocity is the result of air friction slowing down your fall to the point that gravity no longer accelerates you, it's based on mass, surface area, and atmospheric composition. Without an atmosphere there's nothing to create drag and slow you down.
Orbit is basically perpetually falling, and the orbits all happen at roughly the same speed. What changes how fast a satellite can go around the earth (or the direction it moves in) is the height of the orbit.
originally posted by: InachMarbank
I just started thinking about space program stuff pretty recently. Among other things, I can't seem to wrap my head around the gravitational intricacies of how satellites stay in orbit.
I have asked this kick off question before and run into a wall on a different site. Maybe the community here at ATS can help me see the light... Here goes...
What is the terminal velocity of an object falling in a vacuum?
Great job Trump. No need to waste money on fairy tales.