StarShot

[MartG]

Perhaps they'll use the time while the probes are en-route to build a huge and sensitive orbiting receiver to pick up the extremely weak signals from the probes

[p1stonhead]

MartG said:

Perhaps they'll use the time while the probes are en-route to build a huge and sensitive orbiting receiver to pick up the extremely weak signals from the probes

Thats what they said I believe. 'We have ages until they start sending back signals to figure out how to recieve them!' or something of the like I heard

[rhinochopig]

p1stonhead said:

MartG said:

Perhaps they'll use the time while the probes are en-route to build a huge and sensitive orbiting receiver to pick up the extremely weak signals from the probes

Thats what they said I believe. 'We have ages until they start sending back signals to figure out how to recieve them!' or something of the like I heard

They'll send data in betamax and in the meantime we'll have moved on to VHS.

All very similar to the first Star-trek film

[Eric Mc]

We have this type of situation all the time.

Much of the technology used on spacecraft (both manned and unmanned) is already obsolete even before the first flight. Imagine the software and hardware that is on the two Voyager spacecraft. It dates from around 1972 or so and is still providing useful data after 45 years.

[rhinochopig]

Eric Mc said:

We have this type of situation all the time.

Much of the technology used on spacecraft (both manned and unmanned) is already obsolete even before the first flight. Imagine the software and hardware that is on the two Voyager spacecraft. It dates from around 1972 or so and is still providing useful data after 45 years.

Not just space but any complex systems - defence, nuclear, petro-chem etc. Two factors at play:

• Proven tech is nearly always preferable due to a better understanding of the failure modes
• They take so long to design and substantiate that by the time you have finished, the world of S&T has moved on. If you kept updating, you'd never finish.

[Eric Mc]

Yes - and something that is not appreciated by many, especially if the technology is perceived to be "cutting edge", such as spaceflight.

[MartG]

Eric Mc said:

We have this type of situation all the time.

Much of the technology used on spacecraft (both manned and unmanned) is already obsolete even before the first flight. Imagine the software and hardware that is on the two Voyager spacecraft. It dates from around 1972 or so and is still providing useful data after 45 years.

Yes - towards the end of its operational life, NASA engineers were forced to scour ebay for spares for the Shuttle's computers as none were available new

[Toaster]

p1stonhead said:

Eric Mc said:

Toaster's posts in this forum invariably tend to put a bad taste on every discussion. My policy now is just to ignore his comments as the threads end up deviating from genuine discussion and interest on the topic in question.

Its really bizarre isnt it? He just turns up and puts a stter on everything.

He is probably a creationist out to try and sabotage the advancement of science

I'd be interested to hear what he has done to advance science himself. His answer was 'oh indeed I have [advanced science]'

Interesting views, what your saying is that unless someone agrees and doesn't question or discuss then their input is not valid

Eric stated

Eric Mc said:

as far as we can see, it will be entirely funded privately, so nobody's taxes will be getting spent on it.

So why is 'private' money better than tax payers money, if its the same scientists undertaking the project the outcome should be no different. Seems a fair enough question to me. Money from a venture capital unless anyone can show us differently requires a return even a very long term one.

Some of the comments and views are so singular and simplistic because not only does Public money (Tax) get a good return it also attracts 'Private' money here is a great example.

"Every additional pound of public money invested in medical research results in an additional 99p investment from the private sector, according to research published today in BMC Medicine...The researchers, led by Professor Jonathan Grant, Director of the Policy Institute at King’s College London, found an economic ‘spillover’ effect equivalent to a real annual rate of return for the economy of around 17%, so a £1 public spending investment is equivalent to the UK economy receiving 17p interest each and every year."

http://www.kcl.ac.uk/newsevents/news/newsrecords/2...

So returning to Starshot, if Globally this was a project for Humanity and all govenments contributed and other interested parties so both Taxes and private funding went towards this project, it could get off the ground faster and have a huge amount of funding to help make this a success for Humanity.

So Eric whats the problem with Tax money being used?

[Toaster]

MartG said:

Eric Mc said:

We have this type of situation all the time.

Much of the technology used on spacecraft (both manned and unmanned) is already obsolete even before the first flight. Imagine the software and hardware that is on the two Voyager spacecraft. It dates from around 1972 or so and is still providing useful data after 45 years.

Yes - towards the end of its operational life, NASA engineers were forced to scour ebay for spares for the Shuttle's computers as none were available new

Happens in all industries and I do think most people are aware, as it affects most of us one way or another.

Its not something limited just to space and high tech. Gas, Electric, Communications, Rail, Road, Farming, Banking, name an industry thats not affected by obsolecence its why so many lose their jobs.