SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
NASA is considering four proposed space telescopes and will likely launch one of them in the 2030s as a flagship mission, like the Hubble Space Telescope or the James Webb Space Telescope:
- Large Ultraviolet/Optical/Infrared Surveyor (LUVOIR), a multipurpose follow-up mission to the Hubble Space Telescope and the James Webb Space Telescope with a 8-16 meter (26-52 foot) primary mirror that would make discoveries on exoplanets, dark matter, star formation, the earliest galaxies of the universe, and within our own solar system.
- Habitable Exoplanet Imaging Mission (HabEx), a smaller telescope than LUVOIR with a 4-8 meter (13-26 foot) primary mirror and instruments sensitive to ultraviolet, visible and near-infrared light to find worlds outside our solar system that could harbor life. HabEx could fly with a coronagraph, a component inside the telescope to mask starlight and reveal faint reflections from planets, or a starshade, a separate vehicle flying in formation with the telescope to blot out starlight.
- Origins Space Telescope, a far-infrared surveyor with a primary mirror up to 9 meters (30 feet) in diameter that would be a successor to NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope and the European Space Agency's Herschel Space Observatory. The Origins Space Telescope will investigate how galaxies, stars and planets form, search for water and greenhouse gases on exoplanets, and study interstellar dust.
- The Lynx X-ray telescope, following in the footsteps of NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory and ESA's XMM-Newton mission, will study the dawn of the first black holes, and the epoch of reionization, when the first galaxies and light sources emerged after the Big Bang.
The LUVOIR space telescope would be the closest to a successor of Hubble, covering a similar range of wavelengths. It is also similar in size to two recent proposals: the High Definition Space Telescope (HDST) and the Advanced Technology Large-Aperture Space Telescope (ATLAST).
The JWST was not designed to be serviceable and will likely only last for 5-10 years after its planned launch in October 2018. It has a 6.5 meter primary mirror. Hubble has been operating since 1990 but only has a 2.4 meter primary mirror.
The Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope will launch in the 2020s.
(Score: 2) by Absolutely.Geek on Monday July 24 2017, @10:14PM (11 children)
As an outsider, I live in New Zealand, I have never understood the American predilection with insanely huge military spending.
The US spends many times more then any other nation on having the biggest military; but what for? Who are you so afraid of? Who is coming to attack you? What is the point of having so many guns/bombs/missiles/boats/planes/subs?
I also don't understand why the American tax payer is happy to foot the bill; when issues like education and health care are is such a sad state in your country; infrastructure is in need of repair and still taxes are spent on more military power.
I would love to see some of that military spending going to space research/development. But I think (from an outsiders point of view) that you have so much more to spend the money on closer to home. Keep the NASA budget the same (adjusted for inflation) and cut spending on another couple of hundred tanks and a boat or two and fix some bridges and take care of your sick and wounded.
Don't trust the police or the government - Shihad: My mind's sedate.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 24 2017, @10:52PM (3 children)
As a New Zealander also, what happens when someone unfriendly knocks on our door? There is definitely a conversation to be had about this.
(Score: 2) by Absolutely.Geek on Monday July 24 2017, @11:14PM (2 children)
It really depends on what they want; if someone is trying to invade; then we are SOL since we effectively have no military power. However in todays world an invasion is extremely unlikely; economic invasion is much more likely and is in fact an ongoing process.
But in the theoretical case that someone is going to invade. We would call for assistance from our allies; which include the US. I am not advocating that the US stops military spending; I am merely pointing out that the level of spending is not justified.
Dropping their spending by 20% on military and reallocating that money to other endeavors still keeps the money in their economy and would not diminish their position of #1 military power in the world.
Don't trust the police or the government - Shihad: My mind's sedate.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday July 24 2017, @11:41PM (1 child)
> Dropping their spending by 20% on military and reallocating that money to other endeavors
Few Americans fully realize that the $50 Billion raise that Trumps wants to give the Pentagon is a mere 10% of the current half-trillion annual defense budget.
Them numbers just dang too big...
(Score: 2) by Absolutely.Geek on Monday July 24 2017, @11:52PM
Just imagine going the other way; instead of spending $5.5Trillion (up by 10%) over the next 10 years on the military. Cut that to "only" $4Trillion (down by 20%).
That remaining $1Trillion could do a lot of good in other places; How much good would an extra $100 Billion do for the schooling system over the next 10 years? How about an extra $200 Billion on infrastructure over the next 10 years; how would the various research bodies use and extra $100 Billion, maybe a battery break through; fusion; cancer not being a thing anymore. The mind boggles at what we can achieve given the motivation and funding.
Don't trust the police or the government - Shihad: My mind's sedate.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday July 24 2017, @10:59PM (3 children)
You spend your money right, and your NASA funding can help the military and vice versa.
That WFIRST telescope in the summary? A declassified NRO satellite donated to NASA. It's considered obsolete, but part of the agreement is that NASA does not point it at Earth.
And don't forget the X-37B [wikipedia.org].
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Absolutely.Geek on Monday July 24 2017, @11:23PM (2 children)
Agreed; some of the NASA and military goals overlap; but that still doesn't look at the root of the issue; from my point of view.
Likewise some military spending overlaps health care; but that doesn't really increase health funding to a significant degree. e.g. keeping wounded solders alive has probably helped many more car crash victims then it has helped solders; but that same research and development could have been done without the pretext of having to save military lives; it is a question of motivation.
Don't trust the police or the government - Shihad: My mind's sedate.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday July 24 2017, @11:30PM (1 child)
Well, if a future President wants to attempt "cutting" U.S.
defensemilitary spending, they could realign funding into programs that directly benefit NASA, health research, and other sciences. Buff up DARPA, create the Space Corps, launch more satellites (if SpaceX gets more Falcon 9/Heavy contracts, that helps them fund the ITS). Buy less aircraft carriers, F35s, F22s, but put frigging lasers on the ones you do buy.[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Absolutely.Geek on Monday July 24 2017, @11:43PM
This is all good but there are other spending targets that don't overlap with military spending; education and infrastructure are two that popped off the top of my head that could use some of a theoretical military spending cut.
If the US dropped 20% of its military budget; some could be reallocated to projects that overlap with military goals but some would not. Overall the amount of spending would not be cut; money would still flow around the US economy; jobs would be created and some would be given a more secure future.
Even at 80% of the current spend on military; the US still maintains the #1 spot at global superpower. And with appropriate allocation of funds to overlapping projects the cut may effectively be to 81 - 82%.
This is all just fluff; since it isn't going to happen. But it always amazes me that the US tax payer is happy spending so much on having such an expensive military.
Don't trust the police or the government - Shihad: My mind's sedate.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by leftover on Tuesday July 25 2017, @12:11AM (2 children)
There are some interesting and involved discussions in reply to your question but none of them provide the 'real' answer. Which is: to our great misfortune, Dwight Eisenhower's warning about the military-industrial complex was ignored. War became ultrabig business and it continues because it is insanely profitable to a very few individuals. Those individuals have used these profits to purchase and maintain control of the political apparatus. Wishes and votes of the people are simply unimportant to them.
Every person I discuss this with, regardless of their current political persuasion, is all in favor of drastically reducing military spending and tending to the problems we are facing. Nobody in control cares what we think.
Bent, folded, spindled, and mutilated.
(Score: 2) by Absolutely.Geek on Tuesday July 25 2017, @12:16AM
it is sad that the will of the people is ignored; it is ignored here also, maybe to a lesser extent but still ignored.
Don't trust the police or the government - Shihad: My mind's sedate.
(Score: 2) by Absolutely.Geek on Tuesday July 25 2017, @01:11AM
Maybe that could be the next soylent poll; "US military budget spend" answers:
Dem - increase
Dem - decrease
Dem - same level
Rep - increase
Rep - decrease
Rep - same level
Ind / Non-US - increase
Ind / Non-US - decrease
Ind / Non-US - same level
Don't trust the police or the government - Shihad: My mind's sedate.