NASA's Kepler Mission Extended For Two Years 58
An anonymous reader writes "A report just released from NASA's senior review panel recommends extending the Kepler mission(Pdf), initially for two years. 'Kepler is not only a unique source of exoplanet discoveries, but also an organizing and rallying point for exo-planet research. It has enabled remarkable stellar science." The scaled-down budget for the extended mission was broadly expected to include funding only for continued operations and management, with no funding for science. Astronomers have already started seeking private funding to continue their Kepler-related work, through crowd-funding websites like PetriDish and FundaGeek, as well as through the non-profit Pale Blue Dot project."
Wonderful (Score:5, Insightful)
This is awesome! The longer Kepler is up, the more chance it has of finding Earth-like planets. It isn't simply a matter of probability, but the need to see three transits to get confirmation. So at least two Earth years, but often more like 3-5 years. The longer it is up, the more longer orbital period planets it will find!
I love this!
But it's too expens--OW (Score:5, Insightful)
Just like SETI, it always ticks me off when space and science projects are shelved because "it costs too much".
The cost to run SETI a year = one army fighter plane
50 years of NASA = the bank-bailout
I've shut people up who say "the space program costs too much!" with those two facts alone. It'd be nice if we did spend too much on astronomy and science. "Sorry Mr. President, we can't go to war with (insert country with oil or other resources we want control of). We decided to spend money on cool shit that's gonna expand our feeble minds for once."
Re:Wonderful (Score:5, Insightful)
This is awesome! The longer Kepler is up, the more chance it has of finding Earth-like planets. It isn't simply a matter of probability, but the need to see three transits to get confirmation. So at least two Earth years, but often more like 3-5 years. The longer it is up, the more longer orbital period planets it will find!
I love this!
I appreciate your optimism, but the NASA senior review panel has absolutely nothing to do with funding decisions, which are all in the hands of Congress. Unless crowd-sourcing works (which is effective for such things as Kickstarter comic book drives, but not science, last I checked), and is more effective than the white house official petition website (aka, not effective) NASA will be out of luck, sad to say.
Re:kickstarter for a space probe? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:But it's too expens--OW (Score:2, Insightful)
Uhm...there are no army fighter planes...fighter aircraft only exist in the airforce and naval services...
Does anybody really care?
Do you realise that what you pointed out adds absolutely nothing to the whole point he was making?
It is obvious you did it just to find something to moan about. TBH, its pretty sad when you're doing it over something so piteously irrelevant as a minor grammar error.
Re: Kepler's produced great stuff (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:But it's too expens--OW (Score:5, Insightful)
You might call it a pendantic asshole point when I say that we haven't gone to "war" in 70 years. But, calling every military action a "war" is incorrect. Just as the president using the military as his personal pop-gun squad without the approval of the people (or more accurately, their elected representatives.) is incorrect.
What a ridiculous thing to say. War is an English word with a commonly accepted meaning, i.e.:
war (wôr)
n.
1.
a. A state of open, armed, often prolonged conflict carried on between nations, states, or parties.
The Iraq War was a war. The Vietnam War was a war. The Afghanistan War is a war. They're all called wars in natural English language, and they all meet the criteria. Sending 100,000 troops into a sovereign nation with the express purpose of toppling their government and replacing it with one friendly to your cause is a war in as classic a sense as you can get.
Whether the White House has found some legal loop hole that allows them to avoid doing what the constitution says they have to do to go to war doesn't have any relevance. If the Attorney General found a way of classifying Afghanistan as a Charity Bake Sale it still wouldn't make it one; it would just mean that the legal code has more holes than Swiss cheese.