The "DON'T PANIC" is a nice touch.
Hopefully in a few billion years the patents will have expired and anyone with the expertise will have the right to decode the disc.However, the ambitious group was not immediately able to explain exactly how this data could be read by other humans who don't have specialized hardware to access the data, much less alien civilizations in the future.
Still can't believe that he sends up an electric car, but only enough battery power to run the cameras and telemetry for 12 hours. I was hoping to be able to follow the car at least until the earth was a little marble hanging in the blackness.I think this is about four hours of Car In Space
Still can't believe that he sends up an electric car, but only enough battery power to run the cameras and telemetry for 12 hours. I was hoping to be able to follow the car at least until the earth was a little marble hanging in the blackness.
I know he was burning through propellant to maintain the proper attitude to keep the earth in the shot but maybe next time he can just gimbal the damn cameras!!!
Tip of the hat to Asimov too:
Roadster's secret cargo: a tiny optical disc, known as an Arch (pronounced "ark"). Theoretically, this format of disc can hold 360TB, and the one aboard the launched car contains Asimov's Foundation book trilogy.
Unlike traditional optical discs, according to the Arch Mission’s press release, this Arch disc is "written by a femtosecond laser on quartz silica glass" and its data is "encoded digitally as 20nm gratings, formed by plasma disruptions from the laser pulses."
"Each dot encodes 8 bits in 5 dimensions of light," the group states. "Theoretical capacity is 360TB per disk, and the Archs are stable for 14B+ years. No other medium offers this kind of data capacity and durability."
However, the ambitious group was not immediately able to explain exactly how this data could be read by other humans who don't have specialized hardware to access the data, much less alien civilizations in the future.
Still can't believe that he sends up an electric car, but only enough battery power to run the cameras and telemetry for 12 hours. I was hoping to be able to follow the car at least until the earth was a little marble hanging in the blackness.
I know he was burning through propellant to maintain the proper attitude to keep the earth in the shot but maybe next time he can just gimbal the damn cameras!!!
Over on Fakebook I was asking a Liberal friend about the carbon footprint of Musk's vanity project but was laughed at. The whole "he needed a payload" is bunk anyhow. He could have sent solidified CO2 rock into space. Seems Musk's version or environmentalism is the same as Al Gore's.
From here:
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/dat...02.05#/?f=A&start=1949&end=2016&charted=3-4-7
US energy use for transportation is about 27 petaBTU or 27*10^15 BTU per year
From here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_gallon_equivalent
114,000 BTU is equivalent to 1 gallon of gasoline
According to:
http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/falconH.html
The fuel load is
~407.6 tonnes per booster
~407.6 tonnes for the core
~107.2 tonnes for stage 2
which is 3 * 407.6 + 107.2 = 1330 tonnes of kerosene which is chemically/energetically similar to gasoline.
Kerosene and gasoline are both about 3.4 tonnes per 1000gal(US)
so fuel load for Falcon is about 391,000 gallons (US)
US transportation gasoline use is 27*10^15 BTU / 114000BTU/gal is 228070175438596491 gallons per year or 624849795722182 gallons/day
so the Falcon launch was about 391000*100/624849795722182 % or 0.00000006% of the daily use of gasoline for transportation in the US. Gives you some rough idea of the emissions.
As for the full carbon footprint of the project (including manufacture of the rockets which he tries to reuse, thus reducing the footprint per launch) is mostly governed by the footprint of the people working on the project. It'll certainly be a tiny fraction of even just the US military's footprint.
The actual report can be found here. It's in English. It's quite long, but interesting. It talks about where those costs come from and how they may be mitigated in the future. Currently lithium battery recycling is almost non-existent, for one. Everywhere there is CO2 there is an economic cost and so cost reduction will see automatic improvements in footprint. Then, the energy source for manufacturing is also a big factor. The cleaner the power source for the factories, the less the CO2 footprint.You are only talking about the fuel for the rocket, not the car itself that became space junk.
Tesla car battery production releases as much CO2 as 8 years of gasoline driving
The 'Vanity Project' is an absurdly low-cost heavy lift rocket
The rocket isn't a vanity project, make a Tesla Sports Car into space junk as payload was.
If We Receive a Message From Aliens, Should We Delete It Without Reading?
Yes. Yes we should. No question.
Then I saw it. It looked cool. I changed my mind.
Or who was in the suit?Did anyone check the trunk?