Профиль

Starship is definitely in a different category because of the way SpaceX is developing it. It’s not an operational rocket.

I don’t think it’s really more common. We haven’t had too many incidents of rockets blowing up on the pad, and with the increase in rockets being launched more of them are going to have problems.

😎

It was such a great moment because here I am excited to read my friend’s book and HEY I FORGOT I’M IN IT

Then I started laughing maniacally and texted @ericsmithrocks.bsky.social to be like OUR BOY

SO MUCH still like this

I was trying to keep it under wraps as long as possible!!!

That's one point of the current definition of planets, having enough mass to be a sphere. It's the last point, clearing the neighborhood of its orbit, where Pluto runs into trouble.

(I haven’t even addressed that the U.S. has no unilateral authority to declare what is and isn’t a planet.)

Plus, given that Pluto is the only planet (and to be clear, it’s still a planet! It’s just a dwarf planet) discovered by an American, this whole thing feels very political at a time when NASA’s science budget is being slashed.

But making Pluto a planet again because of nostalgia is a non-starter to me. I completely understand why people have feelings about it, and those feelings are valid!! But that’s not a reason to change the scientific status of a planetary body.

If the scientific community expands the definition of a planet to include Pluto, that’s great. But that definition should then also include similar bodies like Eris and Ceres as planets.

Ooooh that’s cool though!

I don’t think this telescope has been to JSC! It was built here at Goddard.

OK that’s helpful context — thank you! I haven’t experienced using someone else’s mentions that way before.

Yes! Just not sure why you were sending it to me

?

And if you’re like wtf is char loss HEY I wrote about it at National Geographic before re-entry: www.nationalgeographic.com/science/arti...

Artemis II's last test: Will its heat shield work?Excess charring on Artemis I's heat shield had NASA racing to understand what went wrong—and to ensure the technology was still safe for the current crew's high-speed reentry.www.nationalgeographic.com

VERY good!! It means that all the testing and adjustments to trajectory NASA made likely worked

This was Artemis I’s heat shield. The capsule enters at an angle which creates these marks