Truth, Beauty, and the Evening News

Louis M. Glackens' cartoon in Punch: 'The Yellow Press'. William Randolph Hearst as a jester tossing newspapers with headlines such as 'Appeals to Passion, Venom, Sensationalism, Attacks on Honest Officials, Strife, Distorted News, Personal Grievance, Misrepresentation' to a crowd of eager readers, among them an anarchist assassinating a politician speaking from a platform draped with American flags; on the left, men labeled 'Man who buys the comic supplement for the kids, Businessman, Gullible Reformer, Advertiser, and Decent Citizen' carry bags of money that they dump into Hearst's printing press'. (October 12, 1910)
Eager readers and “Appeals to Passion”, “Venom”, “Sensationalism”, ” Strife”…. (1910)

“It’s fair to say that if news sites were people, most would be diagnosed as clinically depressed right now.”
(“I stopped reading the news. Is the problem me — or the product?”, Amanda Ripley, Washington Post (July 8, 2022) via Wikiquote)

A comic strip started me thinking about the news, fearmongering, viewpoints, and weird groupings from Google News. I’ll be talking about that: along with rich folks, free speech, and whatever else comes to mind.


Free Speech, a Slogan, Journalism, and a (Very) Little History

Pulitzer's New York World front page headline and illustration stating that a torpedo or bomb sunk the Maine. (February 17, 1898)I’ll give editors of Pulitzer’s The World credit for some restraint.

They put a question mark at the end of their February 17, 1898 headline: “Maine Explosion Caused by Bomb or Torpedo?”

That left readers left to ponder whether the question was whether (A) the explosion was caused by either a bomb or a torpedo — or (B) the Maine’s captain and “other experts” might be wrong.

Time passed. Experts who weren’t anonymous analyzed evidence from the Maine’s wreckage. Journalists working for Pulitzer and Hearst moved on to other juicy stories.

And some of the American public began thinking about “appeals to passion” and “sensationalism” illustrated in that “Yellow Journalism” cartoon by Louis M. Glackens.

Somewhere along the line, journalists and editors started being ‘objective’ and ‘unbiased’. Which is why today’s purported articles covering alleged atrocities carefully avoid emulating yesteryear’s gimmicks.

Leading the way, The New York Times adopted “All the News That’s Fit to Print” as their slogan in 1897.1 And, since The New York Times is one of America’s newspapers of record, that slogan must be true. According to The New York Times.

I’ll admit to a bias.

I strongly suspect that many, maybe most, folks see the world through their own eyes: myself included. But I also think that reality is real, no matter how I feel about it.

“The Yellow Press”, Mayor Gaynor’s Letter, and Viewpoints: Including Mine

Louis M. Glackens' cartoon in Punch: 'The Yellow Press'. (October 12, 1910) Detail, text at lower left: Mayor Gaynor's letter published in the New York Evening Post.I think that it’s much easier to see deviations from unbiasedness when it’s ‘one of those people over there’: and not ‘that good person who is one of us’.

I’ve been blessed with a life in which I often lived and worked among folks who didn’t see the world the way I did. That’s partly because of the way my brain is wired — and that’s another topic.

The point is that thanks partly to my eclectic interests and a checkered — kaleidoscopic — assortment of jobs, I’ve learned that folks whose views don’t square with mine aren’t “scoundrels”, or “without souls”. The latter is impossible — and yet another topic.

That said, I do sympathize with Mayor William Jay Gaynor. Partly because he’s Irish-American, mostly because I strongly suspect that he earned his reputation as a reformer.2

“The time is at hand when these journalistic scoundrels have got to stop or get out, and I am ready now to do my share to that end. They are absolutely without souls. If decent people would refuse to look at such newspapers the whole thing would right itself at once. The journalism of New York City has been dragged to the lowest depths of degradation. The grossest railleries and libels, instead of honest statements and fair discussion, have gone unchecked.” — From Mayor Gaynor’s letter published in the New York Evening Post.”
(Quoted in Louis M. Glackens’ “The Yellow Press” cartoon. Punch. (October 12, 1910))

Freedom of Speech, Lèse-Majesté, and “The Apotheosis of Washington”

Detail of 'The Apotheosis of Washington,' United States Capitol rotunda; Constantino Brumidi. (1865)
Detail, Constantino Brumidi’s “The Apotheosis of Washington”, U.S. Capitol rotunda. (1865)

Richard Newton's cartoon: 'Treason!!!', John Bull explosively farts at a poster of George III, as an outraged William Pitt the Younger chastises him. (March 19, 1798)There is a balance, somewhere, between Brumidi’s “The Apotheosis of Washington” and Richard Newton’s “Treason!!!” cartoon.

About “Apotheosis”, I’m pretty sure that 19th century Americans didn’t really believe that their beloved former president had taken his rightful place among the gods.

But the implicit beliefs of rabidly-religious and patriotic radio preachers of my youth weren’t far from it.

The central figure in that cartoon, the one exercising free — speech? — is “Mr Bull”, AKA John Bull, personification of the United Kingdom, the common man, liberty, or something else: depending on which era you’re looking at. The target of John Bull’s disrespect was George III.

King George had been, no question, nutty as walnut pie. What his problem was: that’s been, and still is, debated and debatable.

Now, about Mr. Bull’s apparent rejection of the king’s authority.

Since I’m a Catholic, categorically dissing someone in authority the way Mr Bull did isn’t an option. But mooning a king isn’t the problem. Not specifically at any rate.

Societies need folks with authority, legitimate authority. I’m obliged to show respect for the folks in charge. Those authorities should, in turn, show respect for the basic rights of the human person. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1897-1904, 1907, 1929-1933, and more)

So much for how things should work.

Lèse-majesté, criminalizing lack of respect for a country’s leadership, goes back millennia. The phrase, and our version of the idea, started in the Roman Republic.

Like pretty much everything else involving people, it’s complicated.

America’s had versions of lèse-majesté, starting with the 1789 Sedition Act. So far, they haven’t lasted more than a decade or so each. They all looked good on paper, but grated on my country’s notion that freedom of speech matters.3


By the Pricking of my Thumbs, Something Freaky This Way Comes

Google News feed, the second row of 'My Topics': 'Space', 'Physics', 'Robotics'. (May 27, 2024 6:23 p.m. Central Time)
From “My Topics”, Google News Feed: “Space”, “Physics”, “Robotics”. (May 27, 2024)

Google News feed: 'Physics'. (May 27, 2024 6:23 p.m. Central Time)I check my Google News feed a few times each day.

Toward the end of May, parts of the “My Topics” section got — intermittently weird.

I’m pretty sure I was seeing Google’s nifty new AI at work, but I can’t be sure.

Most of the articles I found focused more on Google’s embarrassingly wacky search AI.

I’ve been noticing the new-and-improved Google AI-generated answers in my Google search results — which occasionally give me useful words and phrases.

On the other hand, I now have to do a little more scrolling before getting to less ‘curated’ results. So it isn’t either gain or loss for me: just another change in routines.

Folks my age are, I gather, supposed to be averse to change. There’s something to that stereotype. I do like my routines.

But — I was born during the Truman administration, and have been paying attention.

Technologies, social standards, and political slogans have shifted. This is not the world I grew up in.

So for me, change has lost much of its shock value.

Google News and ‘Physics’

Google News feed: 'Physics'. (June 11, 2024 8:11 p.m. Central Time)Whatever was — and is — behind the weirdness in Google News and Google Search, it’s not blocking me from information I want.

And I like to think that most folks are savvy enough to realize that the following aren’t physics topics —

  • Biden’s Memorial Day remarks
  • Yet another professional athlete getting sued for sexual assault
  • The current Trump trial
  • Two showbiz stories about The Boys
  • Something creepy about Nicolas Cage

But — there’s that lawyer who didn’t notice, when ChatGPT gave him alternatively-accurate information.

As I keep saying, we humans have big brains. But we also have free will, so using our brains is not automatic.

As for AI : I think the new technology will affect all of us, one way or another.

But I don’t think we’re doomed.

Some of us will either learn new skills or find new jobs. Or do both.

I sure don’t think we’ll be facing a Forbin Project scenario.

Even assuming that an AI ‘woke up’ and decided to take over the world —

I can see it now: Our Hero, defiant to the last, comes face to keyboard with the maniacally malevolent mechanical mastermind. And the Dread Digital Despot says:

Puny human! Bow and cringe before the awesome might of my FILE NOT FOUND!

Sound familiar? I’ve used that gag before.4


Be Afraid — Be Very Afraid! — — — or Not

Samuel D. Ehrhart's cartoon in Punch: 'Merely recognizing a fact'. A large businessman labeled 'Centralized Wealth' using candle snuffs labeled 'Control of Credit, Control of Bank Deposits, Control of Transportation, Control of Public Utilities, Control of Food Supply, Control of Natural Resources, Control of Business, Control of Wall Street' to extinguish candles labeled 'Initiative, Untainted Success, Ambition, Independence, Individualism'. Meanwhile, 'Puck' figure in lower right says 'Sit down! You don't have to talk. This large person is making socialists faster than you can make them!' (January 18, 1911)
“…You don’t have to talk. This large person is making socialists faster than you can make them!” (1911)

In my youth, very few folks were at or near the top of the socioeconomic ladder.

That’s still true. Obviously.

Complaints that the top one percent have too much wealth may be justified. Or not.

Someone on a late-night talk show, decades back, said that “enough” wealth was 20 percent more than what you have at the moment. Whether or not that’s backed up by verifiable research: it sounds about right.

With election-year hoopla in progress, fear of “centralized wealth” is an almost-inevitable talking point.

There’s some reason for that fear. Wealth, or poverty, doesn’t guarantee virtue. And rich folks have options that others don’t: including deciding what their newspaper, magazine, or studio churns out.

But I don’t think wealth, or poverty, guarantees vice, either. It just affects our options.

I was going someplace with this. Let me think.

Free speech. Viewpoints. Headlines and using our brains. Right.

Wealth, Averages, and Attitudes

Joseph Keppler's 'The Bosses of the Senate' cartoon, first published in Puck Magazine. (January 13, 1889) This version by the by the J. Ottmann Lithographing Company, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.Granted that having too much of a society’s wealth controlled by too few folks could be a problem: I haven’t been bothered by knowledge that my boss was wealthier than I was.

Now that I’m retired, it’s a moot point, and that’s yet again another topic.

Back in the day, I wanted the boss to be stinking rich: so that there’d be enough left over to cover my paycheck.

That principle would have applied, even if I had worked for some corporation. Again, having too much wealth controlled by too few people can be a problem.

And sometimes just having wealth is a problem. Or seems to be.

Lifestyles of the rich and foolish
J.D. Roth, Get Rich Slowly (April 1, 2019; updated December 5, 2023)

“…We hear all the time about the ‘lifestyles of the rich and famous’. Today, on April 1st, let’s look at some lifestyles of the rich and foolish….

“…Over a period of fifteen years, Cage earned more than $150 million. He blew through that money buying things like:

  • Fifteen homes, including an $8 million English castle that he never stayed in once.
  • A private island.
  • Four luxury yachts.
  • A fleet of exotic cars, including a Lamborghini that used to belong to the Shah of Iran.
  • A dinosaur skull he won after a bidding contest with Leonardo DiCaprio.
  • A private jet.

“It’s not fair to characterize Cage as ‘broke’ — he’s still a bankable movie star — but his net worth is reportedly only about $25 million. (That’s like someone with an average income having a net worth of roughly $25,000.) He could be worth ten times as much but his foolish financial habits have caused him woe….”

I don’t know what that article’s “average income” is. Statistically speaking, “average”, “mean”, and “median” — have several meanings.

A quick glance at American personal and household incomes — that’s still more topics — told me that the ‘average’ American who’s working full-time earns around $60,000 a year. And the ‘average’ household pulls in around $70,000 a year.5

That’s something like double what I ever took home. But I’m part of a wonderful family, we have a roof over our heads, and food in the pantry: so I’m a happy camper.

Besides, I’ve had more than my fill of moral panic and election-year antics.

“Moral Panic” and Making Sense

Jan Luyken's depiction of Maria van Beckum and her sister-in-law Ursel, executed for being Anabaptists.Speaking of which, seems that the phrase “moral panic” popped up in 1830.

Marshall McLuhan discussed today’s idea of “moral panic” in 1964. The phrase got linked with today’s academic definition of the term — a widespread fear of someone or something — a few years later.

As defined, I think moral panic is a legitimate academic topic.

As perceived, I can sympathize with folks who see McCarthyism, old-school witch-hunts, and being religious, as typical symptoms of moral panic. My teens and the Sixties overlap, and the era’s rabid radio preachers impressed me: a lot.

They also helped start me on a path that eventually led to me becoming a Catholic: which was emphatically not what they were preaching.

Wrenching myself back on-topic — spotting (irrational) moral panic in ‘those people over there’, folks who don’t agree with me on matters of musical taste and pantsuits, is easy.

Noticing when someone who’s on the same page as I am — or in the same chapter, at any rate — stops making sense: that can get tricky.

But it’s important. Partly because I’ve got enough problems without adding screwball beliefs to the mix. And partly because I’m a Catholic. So at the very least, I should avoid making my religious beliefs look like a threat to society.

“…The lay calling has different duties, the supreme knight noted, but the duty to evangelize is particularly crucial today. ‘All of us are called to be missionaries in a society that often views religion, at best, as a matter of private opinion — or at worst, as an enemy of the public good,’ he said. ‘This requires that we live out our mission constantly … at all times, in all places, and to all the people we meet.”
(“Supreme Knight Addresses John Carroll Society”, Columbia Magazine (May 1, 2024)) [emphasis mine]

From Star Trek episode 'Court Martial': DeForest Kelley (left) as Dr. McCoy, Leonard Nimoy (right) as Spock, playing 3D chess. (1967)Happily, my (reluctant) decision to become a Catholic was based on what I thought about facts I’d learned. Not how I felt.

If I’m going to believe something, it has to make sense. No matter how I’m feeling at the moment.6

It’s like an atheist-turned-Catholic said:

“… If Vulcans had a church, they’d be Catholics.”
(John C. Wright, johncwright.livejournal.com (March 21 2008))

Finally, the comic strip that got me started with this week’s post, and a few points I wanted to make.

“Today in the News….”

Hart Studio's Wizard of Id comic strip: 'Today in the news ... I'm starting to get how this works.' (June 8, 2024)
“…I’m starting to get how this works.” Wizard of Id. (June 8, 2024)

I don’t know if fearmongering is becoming more common in America’s news.

I do know that I didn’t watch the evening news for a few months, back in the 1970s. Couldn’t, actually. When I had access to a television again, I noticed how the pacing, images, vocal delivery, and other factors were affecting my emotions.

That’s when I stopped watching the evening news. I’m a very emotional man, and getting those feelings revved up seemed like a bad idea. Particularly since they were interfering with my thinking about whatever truth might be in the dramatic accounts.

And that gets me to truth and beauty.

Truth is important. So is beauty. We’re surrounded by beauty and wonders. Paying attention can lead us to God, if we’re doing it right. (Catechism, 32-33, 283, 341, 2500)

News and communications media in general should serve the common good with “information based on truth, freedom, justice, and solidarity”. (Catechism 2492-2499, particularly 2494)

Brian H. Gill's fictional 'Totally Depressing News Network: TDNN'.I emphatically do not want America’s news networks to start implying that Catholics are always right, and that the Catholic Church can do no wrong.

That would not be truthful. We’ve been around for two millennia. During that time, some of us have set a bad example. Including folks who should have known better.

And I sure don’t want a return to the “good old days” when “presidents” were getting their weapons from us, while “dictators” were getting theirs from the Soviet Union.

I would prefer seeing more straightforward reporting, less fearmongering, and even less partisan labeling.

I can’t do anything about news media’s editorial preferences.

But I can keep an eye on my own habits, do what I can to support “truth, freedom, justice, and solidarity”: and remember that my neighbors aren’t just the folks who agree with me.

Good Advice, Actually

Hart Studio's Wizard of Id comic strip: 'Hey, you. Hold on a minute ... Trust me. They needed it.' (May 20, 2024)
“…Trust me. They needed it.” Wizard of Id. (May 20, 2024)

I don’t seek wisdom in the comics. But now and then I see something that makes sense. Like that Wizard of Id strip from the second to the last Monday in May.

I won’t try pretending that all’s right with the world. It’s not.

But I won’t do myself, or others, any good by fretting or fuming.

So breathing in, breathing out, and just sitting still for a second, might be a good idea: now and then, at least.

In any case, I don’t particularly enjoy feeling afraid, or angry, or distressed.

And I’ve found that thinking about those problems I can actually do something about is easier when I’m not overwrought.

In case you still haven’t had your fill of my writing, here’s more:


1 American journalism — Mickey Dugan, AKA The Yellow Kid — and more stuff you may or may not find interesting:

2 Politics and people:

3 A caricaturist, a king, hot-button topics, and a nutty pie:

From 'The Phantom Creeps': Bela Lugosi (left) as Doctor Zorka. Edwin 'Bud' Wolfe (right) as The Robot. (1939) see https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0031796/ , https://belalugosi.com/media/film/1931-1939/the-phantom-creeps/4 Of these, The Robot from “The Phantom Creeps” seems the most plausible:

5 Statistical stuff:

6 Looking back, and ahead:

Posted in Discursive Detours, Journal | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Well, That’s Nice: Class of 1974’s Graduation Ceremony

Here’s something I noticed, from Sunday’s news:

Graduation ceremony finally happens, 50 years later
Max Matza, BBC News (June 9, 2024)

“Fifty years after a tornado warning led to the abrupt cancellation of a high school graduation for students in Moore, Oklahoma, the class of 1974 has finally walked across stage to receive diplomas….

“…The event 50 years ago was never rescheduled, and for years the class of 500 pupils had discussed the idea of holding a formal graduation ceremony for themselves….”

At the time, there were reasons for not rescheduling the event. And the lack of a ceremony didn’t affect their graduation: I gather that the students picked up their diplomas later, in the school gymnasium.

Even so, ceremonies matter. Which I figure is why the class of 1974 finally got their graduation day: and another class, whose graduation ceremony would have happened early in the COVID-19 pandemic, had their own belated commencement exercise.

That’s a very welcome bit of good news.

Posted in Discursive Detours | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Starliner, Dream Chaser, and Beyond: The Sky is Not the Limit

NASA's photo iss065e049854: view from a SpaceX Crew Dragon Endeavour window, two of the International Space Station's main solar arrays and Earth's horizon, 271 miles above the south Atlantic between Argentina and South Africa. (May 20, 2021)
Low Earth orbit scene: Solar arrays of the ISS, seen from SpaceX Crew Dragon Endeavour. (May 20, 2021)

Stanley Kubrick/Geoffrey Unsworth's '2001: A Space Odyssey' (1968)When I was young, the future was exciting: cities on the Moon, computers that can fly spaceships, and more.

Then we tried making those dreams a reality; which we’ve been doing. In part.

One goal of this week’s Starliner test flight was having a human pilot handle part of the spacecraft’s approach and docking at the International Space Station. It was a methodical process, pretty much the opposite of dramatic. Starliner handled the actual docking; which, again, was a methodical process. And successful.

If you read nothing else in today’s post, by the way, read Butch Wilmore’s “Just a Thought”, a Few Minutes Before Liftoff. Or check out whatever looks interesting:


Boeing Starliner Crew Flight Test

Screen captures from NASA TV's Launch coverage of the June 1, 2024, Boeing Starliner Crew Flight Test.
Second try for Crew Flight Test, scrubbed 3 minutes, 50 seconds before liftoff. (June 1, 2024)

The Boeing Starliner has flown before, but not with people aboard. The first crewed test flight was supposed to be in 2017. Uncrewed orbital flight tests in 2019 and 2022 weren’t flawless, but the Starliner came back in one piece each time.

Screenshots from NASA's coverage of 'Boeing Starliner Crew Flight Test Launch'. (May 6,2024) via YouTubeI talked about that, and what would have been the first Starliner test flight carrying people, last month. Briefly, an oxygen relief valve wouldn’t stop buzzing at about 40 cycles per second, so decision-makers canceled that launch.

They tried again last Saturday. That time a ground launch sequencer balked.

NASA, Mission Partners Target June 5 Crew Flight Test Launch
Danielle Sempsrott, NASA’s Boeing Crew Flight Test (June 2, 2024)

“…Technicians and engineers with ULA (United Launch Alliance) worked overnight and on Sunday to assess the ground support equipment at the launch pad that encountered issues during the countdown and scrubbed the June 1 launch attempt. The ULA team identified an issue with a single ground power supply within one of the three redundant chassis that provides power to a subset of computer cards controlling various system functions, including the card responsible for the stable replenishment topping valves for the Centaur upper stage. All three of these chassis are required to enter the terminal phase of the launch countdown to ensure crew safety….”
[emphasis mine]

NASA, Mission Partners Forgo June 2 Launch of Crew Flight Test
Elyna Niles-Carnes, NASA’s Boeing Crew Flight Test (June 1, 2024)

“…Saturday’s launch to carry NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams to the International Space Station scrubbed due to an observation of a ground launch sequencer. The system was unsuccessful in verifying the sequencer’s necessary redundancy….”
[emphasis mine]

There’s probably a detailed description of ground launch sequencers somewhere, but I didn’t find it. Instead, I’ll paraphrase what folks doing NASA TV coverage of Saturday’s launch attempt said.1

Speaking of which, it’s a delight to have coverage of a launch done by folks who actually know something about spacecraft, technology, and science.

Saturday’s Attempt, a Ground Launch Sequencer, and Paying Attention

Anyway, the ground launch sequencer is a computer — software running on a computer, actually — that sends instructions to equipment, and keeps track of the equipment’s responses.

If a piece of equipment doesn’t respond, or responds oddly, then the ground launch sequencer stops the countdown and tells a human that’s something’s not right.

At this point I could have conniptions over computers controlling our lives. But I won’t.

Launching a spacecraft involves thousands of devices doing what they’re supposed to do, when they’re supposed to do it. That sort of meticulous attention to detail is something computers are good at. Humans, most of us, not so much.

So I’ll be glad that the ground launch sequencer spotted something amiss, three minutes and 50 seconds before launch: and that the humans decided to pay attention.

Another Glimpse Inside Starliner’s Crew Capsule

Screen capture from NASA TV's Launch coverage of the June 1, 2024, Boeing Starliner Crew Flight Test. View inside the Starliner capsule, after launch scrubbed.
View inside Starliner capsule, gear packed for launch. (June 1, 2024)

Boeing's infographic: Starliner design. (2024) via BBC News, used w/o permissionI’m probably more interested than most in how spacecraft designers make the most use of very limited cabin volume.

I spent more time than I probably should have this week, trying to find something more up-to-date and detailed than last month’s BBC News infographic. And finding nothing either recent or consistent with other descriptions.

I suspect my frustration’s partly due to Boeing’s having changed details in their design over the last decade, and partly to Starliner’s flexibility. The capsule carries up to seven people, or a mix of crew and cargo.

Or will, assuming that it gets crew-rated.2

Launch Complex 41, the Crew Access Arm, and — Starliner: Lucky 13??

Screen capture from NASA TV's Launch coverage of the June 1, 2024, Boeing Starliner Crew Flight Test. View inside the Starliner capsule, after launch scrubbed.
Inside Space Launch Complex 41’s Crew Access Arm, reconnecting with Starliner. (June 1, 2024)
Google Maps: John F. Kennedy Space Center, Launch Pad 39A, CCAFS Launch Complex 41, Space Launch Complex 40. Used w/o permission.
John F. Kennedy Space Center, including CCAFS Launch Complex 41. Google Maps.

Launch Complex 41 predates Boeing’s Starliner by a half-century. It’s been in use since the mid-1960s; launching the Helios, Viking, and Voyager probes. Enough name-dropping.

In 2015, Launch Complex 41 started getting set up for human spaceflight: including the Crew Access Tower and its Crew Access Arm.

Together, the tower and arm let crew enter or leave their spacecraft in comparative safety. And without tracking dust and dirt into the spacecraft.

The Crew Access Arm swings out of the way for launch.

From the screenshots I took, it looks like the ULA Crew Access Arm is custom-fitted for the Boeing Starliner. Which makes sense, since it’s probably the only crewed spacecraft that’ll be launched from that particular site. In the immediate future, at any rate.

In the long run, though, I think crew access arms will be more like today’s passenger boarding bridges: those one-size-fits-all movable corridors connecting airport terminals and airplanes.

We’re still very early in the Space Age.

So far, only a dozen types of spacecraft have carried people into space: defined in this case as 50 miles or more above Earth’s sea level.3

  • Spacecraft carrying people
    • Vostok (1961-1963)
    • Mercury (1961-1963)
    • X-15 (1962-1968)
    • Voskhod (1964-1965)
    • Gemini (1965-1966)
    • Soyuz (1967-still in use)
    • Apollo (1968-1975)
    • Space Shuttle (1981-2011)
    • Shenzhou (2003-still in use)
    • SpaceShipOne (2004-still in use)
    • Crew Dragon (2020-still in use)
    • New Shepard (2021-still in use)
    • Starliner (2024-flight test scheduled)
  • Space stations
    • Salyut (1971-1986)
    • Skylab (1973-1974)
    • Almaz (1974-1977)
    • Mir (1986-2000)
    • International Space Station (ISS) (2000-still in use)
    • Tiangong program (2012-2016)
    • Tiangong Space Station (2021-still in use)

The Boeing Starliner would be the 13th type of crewed spacecraft. About that:

Superstition: The attribution of a kind of magical power to certain practices or objects, like charms or omens. Reliance on such power, rather than on trust in God, constitutes an offense against the honor due to God alone, as required by the first commandment. (2110)
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, Glossary)

“Superstition is the deviation of religious feeling and of the practices this feeling imposes. It can even affect the worship we offer the true God, e.g., when one attributes an importance in some way magical to certain practices otherwise lawful or necessary. To attribute the efficacy of prayers or of sacramental signs to their mere external performance, apart from the interior dispositions that they demand, is to fall into superstition.”
(Catechism, 2111)

Butch Wilmore’s “Just a Thought”, a Few Minutes Before Liftoff

Screen capture from NASA TV's Launch coverage of the June 5, 2024, Boeing Starliner Crew Flight Test, third countdown. Liftoff from CCAFS Launch Complex 41. (June 5, 2024)
ULA/Boeing Starliner Crew Flight Test launch. (June 5, 2024)
Screen capture from NASA TV's Launch coverage of the June 5, 2024, Boeing Starliner Crew Flight Test, third countdown. One minute, four seconds, after liftoff, view from booster. (June 5, 2024)
Starliner Calypso on its way to orbit. (June 5, 2024)

Flag of the United States of America.On the whole, I like being an American.

That doesn’t mean I’m a conservative.

I’m not a liberal, either.

I’m a Catholic, and think that what Calypso’s mission commander Barry “Butch” E. Wilmore said about unity, resilience, and unified efforts for the common good, makes sense.

“… Just a thought … As we were reached the pad … there’s that American flag … on the side of the rocket itself, and we know that that represents unity, and resilience, and unified efforts for the common good. And that’s what Suni and I have witnessed this last month: each of you displaying what this nation’s forefathers envisioned: a people committed to God, family and country, a people who use their gifts and talents for the common good, and are passionate, and tough. And we all know that when the going gets tough … the tough get going … Let’s get going….”
(Barry “Butch” E. Wilmore, astronaut, a little over four minutes before launch of the Starliner Calypso, from NASA video coverage (June 5, 2024))

And get going they did, a few minutes later. Calypso matched orbit with the International Space Station Thursday.

The docking happened about an hour later than it would have on a perfect flight. A few thrusters didn’t fire correctly during a step-by-step test of that system. More about that, and why it wasn’t a major problem, from NASA:


Commercial Spaceflight

NASA's infographic: Commercial Low Earth Orbit Destinations, Commercial Low Earth Orbit Development Program. (February 3, 2022)
Looking ahead: proposed low Earth orbit commercial space stations. (2022)

The last I checked, the International Space Station will be deorbited in January of 2031. Probably after detaching several modules for use elsewhere.

What’s left of Earth’s largest space station will be dropped in the South Pacific’s “spacecraft cemetery”. That’s not an ideal recycling solution, but it’s the best we’ve got right now.

As the ISS transitions from working laboratory to historic memory, it looks like we’ll have a growing number of smaller orbiting stations.

Next-Generation Commercial Space Stations Are Serious Business for NASA
Commercial Low Earth Orbit Development Program, NASA
(February 3, 2022)

Over two decades ago, NASA and an international team of space agencies began something long dreamt of and quite remarkable: a permanent human presence in space aboard the International Space Station. About the size of a football field, the orbiting laboratory and human habitat is a bastion of science and discovery where research is making life better on Earth and paving the way to the Moon and Mars….

“…While individual commercial space stations will have more niche, specialized uses, the capabilities of future space destinations overall will become much more versatile. Right now, the International Space Station is primarily focused on scientific research and technology demonstrations, making it more akin to a lab where astronauts live and work amongst scientific equipment. Some future commercial destinations will contain the lab equipment that NASA needs to advance its mission in low-Earth orbit. Non-NASA space travelers flying to low-Earth orbit, like private individuals or companies, may seek out commercial space stations that serve as hotels or perhaps even a movie studio to shoot a film.…”
[emphasis mine]

I haven’t checked on the status of the Axiom Port Module, Nanoracks, Northrup Grumman, Blue Origin, and other proposed space stations. I like the sound and idea of Blue Origin’s Orbital Reef, and that’s almost another topic.4

We Can’t Go On Flying Like This

NASA photo: Northrop Grumman's Cygnus cargo craft, held by the Canadarm2 robotic arm, shortly before being released from the International Space Station. iss058e011401 (February 8, 2019)
Northrop Grumman’s Cygnus cargo craft, at the International Space Station. (2019)

I can imagine an airline that throws away aircraft after each flight, and stays in business.

But I’ve got a lively imagination. Profligateaire’s clientele would be ultra-rich nitwits with a favorable — to Profligateaire — brains-to-cash ratio.

Even so, I’m not convinced that Profligateaire [a thoroughly fictional company] would really work.

Then again, I once saw an advertisement for solid-gold diamond-tipped swizzle sticks. But only once. Decades back. Looks like there’s a limit to human folly. Or maybe marketing for such things isn’t wasted on folks in my socioeconomic strata. And I’m wandering off-topic.

The point I’m groping for is that commercial spaceflight is viable now, despite all launch systems being single-use, at least in part.

Confirming my impression that commercial human spaceflight is currently confined mostly to space tourism, and that space tourism is limited to a fraction of the world’s very rich, would take more time and effort than I like.5

But the rest — companies that put communications, Earth observation, and other satellites in orbit — apparently are making a profit, even with today’s throwaway launch technology.

That’s impressive, but not an argument for accepting space technology’s status quo.

For one thing, I see no problem with outfits like Orbital Sciences Corporation‎ and SpaceX making higher profits. For another, we’re learning that there are limits to how much junk we can safely drop into landfills. Or the South Pacific’s “spacecraft cemetery”.

Which is why I think designing partly-reusable spacecraft like Dragon and Starliner was a good idea. Designing fully-reusable ones would be even better: but that’ll take time.

Dream Chaser Tenacity: Another Step in the Right Direction

NASA/Kim Shiflett's photo: 'Dream Chaser Tenacity, Sierra Space's uncrewed cargo spaceplane, is processed inside the Space Systems Processing Facility (SSPF) at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida on Monday, May 20, 2024.'
Dream Chaser Tenacity, cargo spaceplane, at Kennedy Space Center, Florida. (May 20, 2024)

NASA, Sierra Space Deliver Dream Chaser to Florida for Launch Preparation
Jamie Groh, Brian Newbacher; Kennedy Space Center, NASA (May 20, 2024)

“As part of NASA’s efforts to expand commercial resupply in low Earth orbit, Sierra Space’s uncrewed spaceplane arrived at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida ahead of its first flight to the International Space Station.

“The Dream Chaser spaceplane, named Tenacity, arrived at Kennedy on May 18 inside a climate-controlled transportation container from NASA’s Neil Armstrong Test Facility in Sandusky, Ohio, and joined its companion Shooting Star cargo module, which arrived on May 11….”

Development of the Sierra Space Dream Chaser has been similar to the SpaceX Dragon’s.

The version that’s now ready for flight testing carries cargo only. I gather that getting an airworthiness (spaceworthiness?) okay is easier for cargo carriers than getting human-rating certification.

The Dream Chaser was originally planned as a spacecraft that carries up to seven people into low Earth orbit and back.

Sierra Space apparently still plans to build a human-rated Dream Chaser. How long it will take for that version to be ready, or if it ever will be, I don’t know.

Dream Chaser Tenacity, a cargo-only version, should be ready for flight testing in September. Whether it’s successful, and where it’ll land: that, I also don’t know.

Dream Chasers are designed to land as gliders at commercial airports, like Huntsville International Airport. Taking off again is another matter.

The Dream Chaser rides into space on the top of a conventional launch vehicle. So again, part of the launch system is still single-use. Except for the SpaceX Falcon series, if that’s an option: and even those aren’t fully reusable.

Another throwaway part of the Dream Chaser system is its Shooting Star module, with extra cargo space and solar panels.6 Cool name, but — I’ll leave it at that.

Spacecraft: One Step at a Time

Max Valier's rocket-propelled aircraft concepts. (ca. 1920s)I mentioned Max Valier’s spaceplanes last month, and discussed a might-have-been 20th century that didn’t happen a couple years back.

Valier’s transatlantic propeller-driven airliners with rocket boosters look weird these days. But I think Ron Miller is right about Valier’s “greatest contribution”:

“…Valier’s greatest contribution was that he developed an incremental, evolutionary approach to the development of the spaceship. He began with an ordinary commercial aircraft. Step-by-step through different generations of design, this would gradually develop into rocket-assisted flight and then into full-fledged rocket transport. Finally, it would result in a wingless interplanetary spacecraft. He also promoted the idea of a transatlantic passenger rocket. He envisioned that this would make the trip from Berlin to New York in less than an hour….”
By Rocket Plane Across the Atlantic“, Ron Miller/io9, HistoricWings.com (March 23, 2018))

A century later, outfits like SpaceX and Sierra Space have been taking a similarly “incremental, evolutionary approach to the development of the spaceship….”

The Dragon 1 and 2 spacecraft have been making supply runs to the International Space Station since 2012. By this time next year, the Dream Chaser may be world’s first commercial spaceplane.7

Artist's concept of Blue Origin's 'Orbital Reef': a 'mixed-use business park' for commercial activities and tourism.A decade from now, fully-reusable spacecraft may be making regular runs to orbiting labs, manufacturing stations, luxury resorts: and businesses we haven’t invented yet.

Meanwhile, some of us will be preparing for longer journeys.

“…Given ships or sails adapted to the breezes of heaven, there will be those who will not shrink from even that vast expanse….”
(Johannes Kepler (1610) from “Kepler’s Conversation with Galileo’s Sidereal Messenger” , trans. Edward Rosen (1965) via Wikiquote)

The sky is no longer the limit:


1 The crew, the spacecraft, and a little background:

2 More background:

3 A PBB by any other name:

4 Space stations, and a temporary solution:

5 Business, but not as usual:

6 (Somewhat) reusable spacecraft:

7 Something old, something new:

Posted in Discursive Detours, Science News | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

June 6, 2024: Something a Little Different This Week

There’s routine medical stuff happening Friday, so I’ve been getting this week’s ‘Saturday’ post written and ready to go today.

Some of that “ready to go” will have to wait until this afternoon, since part of what I’ve been talking about is the in-progress Starliner Crew Test Flight. Which, so far, has been going rather well.

That, for me, is good news. More about that this week’s ‘Saturday’ post. Where the medical stuff falls on the good news – bad news continuum: that, I’ll learn tomorrow.

Posted in Journal | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Alcubierre Drive: a New, Subluminal, Physical Solution

From 'Constant Velocity Physical Warp Drive Solution', Jared Fuchs et al., 'Figure 1: Example of an Alcubierre warp trajectory with three phases of flight: (i) Passenger enters the warp bubble at rest w.r.t to the reference observer at point A. The passenger will not have any coordinate velocity compared to the reference observer ... (iii) Warp bubble decelerates to a stop at point B at rest w.r.t to the reference observer and the passenger exits the drive.' (2024)
Example of an Alcubierre warp trajectory, from “Constant Velocity Physical Warp Drive Solution”. (2024)

It’s been 30 years since a Mexican theoretical physicist said that a warp drive was possible: hypothetically. And published math that backed up his claim.

Last month, a team of scientists showed how we could build a warp drive: again, with math backing up their claim.

This year’s variation on the Alcubierre drive couldn’t travel faster than light. But it can, they say, be built with materials we have today.

This is a very big deal. And it’s what I’m talking about this week. Along with whatever else comes to mind.


Speed of Light, Math, and Approaching Infinity

Pulsar Fusion's illustration: their Direct Fusion Drive (DFD) test vehicle. (2023)
Direct Fusion Drive (DFD) test vehicle. (2023)

First of all, we can’t make a vehicle travel faster than light. Not now. Not with any propulsion technology that’s even remotely conventional. And maybe not ever.

The ‘light barrier’ isn’t like the sound barrier — although both involve equations that give answers approaching infinity when approaching the phenomenon’s speed.

Early, very simple, math describing airfoil drag as a function of speed showed that drag became infinite at the speed of sound. According to those early equations.

But scientists had been studying things that travel faster than sound, like meteorites.

And they’d occasionally fire experimental airfoils at supersonic speeds. Which helped them develop more accurate mathematical models. So they knew that accelerating something beyond the speed of sound was possible.

“Breaking the sound barrier” was mainly an engineering issue.

D.H.'s diagram: 'Kinetic energy in special relativity and Newtonian mechanics. Relativistic kinetic energy increases to infinity when approaching the speed of light, thus no massive body can reach this speed.'. (2012)The ‘light barrier’, on the other hand, involves how matter and energy work in this universe.

In physics, momentum is the form of energy an object has due to its motion. The faster it goes, the more energy it has; and the more massive it is — but that’s an angle of relativity I’ll leave for another time.

Newton’s math is an excellent model for objects that are traveling at tiny fractions of the speed of light.

As we pump more energy into an object, making it go faster, though, things get interesting. As an object approaches speed of light, its momentum approaches infinity. For anything that has a rest mass greater than zero, that’s not possible.

This increase in mass was detected at least by 1901.

Since then, increasingly accurate tests of relativistic mass increase have confirmed that this universe does, in fact, have a speed limit.1


New “Warp Drive” Approach: This One is Testable

From 'Constant Velocity Physical Warp Drive Solution', Jared Fuchs et al., 'Figure 3: Metric creation method where trial solutions are used and then modified to construct a physical shell solution. The process starts with density on the left and then generates a solution on the right.' (2024)
Simplified diagram: metric creation method for constructing a physical shell solution. (2024)

The metric creation method outlined above is from the “warp drive” research paper published last month. I’ll be talking about what they found, but not the math.

First, though, I’ll share what a scientist had to say.

Paul Sutter, physicist and “science communicator”, did a pretty good job of discussing this latest analysis of a “warp drive”.

I’m not overly fond of the “warp drive” moniker. But the idea, and the name, got traction with Alcubierre’s “LETTER TO THE EDITOR: The warp drive: hyper-fast travel within general relativity”.2 (Classical and Quantum Gravity, 1994)

New warp drive concept does twist space, doesn’t move us very fast
“While it won’t make a useful spaceship engine, it may tell us more about relativity.”
Paul Sutter, Ars Technica (May 23, 2024)

“…Einstein’s general theory of relativity is a toolkit for solving problems involving gravity that connects mass and energy with deformations in spacetime. In turn, those spacetime deformations instruct the mass and energy how to move. In almost all cases, physicists use the equations of relativity to figure out how a particular combination of objects will move. They have some physical scenario, like a planet orbiting a star or two black holes colliding, and they ask how those objects deform spacetime and what the subsequent evolution of the system should be.

“But it’s also possible to run Einstein’s math in reverse by imagining some desired motion and asking what kind of spacetime deformation can make it possible. This is how the Mexican physicist Miguel Alcubierre discovered the physical basis for a warp drive—long a staple of the Star Trek franchise….”

“…While tantalizing, Alcubierre’s design has a fatal flaw. To provide the necessary distortions of spacetime, the spacecraft must contain some form of exotic matter, typically regarded as matter with negative mass. Negative mass has some conceptual problems that seem to defy our understanding of physics, like the possibility that if you kick a ball that weighs negative 5 kilograms, it will go flying backwards, violating conservation of momentum. Plus, nobody has ever seen any object with negative mass existing in the real Universe, ever….”

“…But there is a way around it, discovered by an international team of physicists led by Jared Fuchs at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. (The team is also affiliated with the Applied Propulsion Laboratory of Applied Physics, a virtual think tank dedicated to the research of, among many other things, warp drives.) In a paper accepted for publication in the journal Classical and Quantum Gravity, the researchers dug deep into relativity to explore if any version of a warp drive could work….”
[emphasis mine]

Gravity, Newton’s Law, Einstein’s Math, and — Negative Mass?

CERN's photo: inserting the ALPHA-g apparatus.
Inserting the ALPHA-g apparatus, used in gravity experiments, at CERN’s Antimatter Factory. (2023)

Backing up a bit, gravity is a very basic part of this universe.

Describing it as a force, as Newton’s law of universal gravitation did, works very well for stuff that’s standing still or moving at tiny fractions of the speed of light.

Wiley Miller's Non Sequitur, Danae's 'petition to end science tyrrany', to repeal the law of gravity. (September 21 2017)Scientific laws, by the way, aren’t like laws written in the United States Code.

They’re regularities scientists have noticed, studied, and described. These descriptions, in turn, let scientists predict what will happen in given situations.

Predicting what will happen sounds a bit like divination. Saul tried something of the sort, getting a postmortem interview with Samuel. (1 Samuel 28:725) That was a bad idea. So is divination. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2115-2117)

But noticing how this universe works, and using that knowledge, is part of being human. It’s what we’re supposed to do. Ethics matter, the same as any other part of our lives, and that’s another topic. (Catechism, 2293-2295)

One more thing, before getting back to my last excerpt from Paul Sutter’s article.

He said that negative mass has never been observed. He’s right about that.

In this context, negative mass is a part of space which has, for some observers, a negative mass density.

Maybe that’s physically impossible.

But the condition fits Einstein’s math.3

“…Us physicists like it when all of our theories line up and agree on the nature of the Universe. So if the energy conditions set real limits on physics—limits where things like negative mass don’t just not exist, but can’t exist—then we’d like a physical theory that says that from the beginning, instead of relying on add ons like the energy conditions.

Exploring how a warp drive might (not) work, and under what conditions and restrictions, is a step in that direction. For years physicists thought that the energy conditions outlawed all kinds of warp drives, yet the new research shows a possible way around that. What comes next will be a win no matter what; whether we get a fancy superluminal warp drive or not. That’s because whatever comes out of future lines of inquiry along these directions, we’re going to learn more about the force of gravity, and just possibly revolutionize our understanding of it.

“And who knows what we’ll get once we understand gravity better.
New warp drive concept…“, Paul Sutter, Ars Technica (May 23, 2024) [emphasis mine]

Math, My Father, and Me: A Digression

From 'Constant Velocity Physical Warp Drive Solution', Jared Fuchs et al., detailed version of the process outlined in Figure 3. 'The starting assumption of the density profile ρ' is that of a spherical shell with an inner radius of R1....' (2024)
Some of the math in “Constant Velocity Physical Warp Drive Solution”, Jared Fuchs et al. (2024)

Much as I’d like to explain how those equations work, I can’t. Which is doubly frustrating, since I enjoy understanding stuff and sharing what I’ve learned — and those standardized tests in high school said I should be good at math.

Maybe so, but I’m guessing that I’m a lot like my father that way.

He told about one question in a calculus test he took. It was partly multiple choice: describing two cylinders, asking for the volume they shared, with five possible answers.

My father did what I would have done. He looked at the two cylinders with his mind’s eye, saw how much space their intersection occupied, and checked off the answer that matched that quantity. Then he tried filling in the “show your work” part of the question.

My father’s equations were garbage. But he was the only one in the class to check off the correct quantity.

He and I emphatically have not lived with aphantasia. That’s not being able to form mental images: first described in 1880 and pretty much ignored ever since. Although I gather there’s been an uptick in interest, and I’m wandering off-topic.4

My experience with calculus was less noteworthy.

I took, but didn’t pass, a calculus class. A couple times I got that familiar ‘aha!’ moment, when ideas fall into place. But each time that happened, my attention flickered — and the ‘aha’ was lost without a trace. Frustrating.

“Exotic Solutions” Offering a “Novel Means of Transportation”

ESO/INAF-VST/OmegaCAM, OmegaCen/Astro-WISE/Kapteyn Institute; via Wikimedia Commons; used w/o permission.That won’t keep me from talking about what scientists do, since I can read what they say about their math.

Constant Velocity Physical Warp Drive Solution
Jared Fuchs, Christopher Helmerich, Alexey Bobrick, Luke Sellers, Brandon Melcher, Gianni Martire; preprint draft (May 4, 2024) via arXiv, Cornell University

“Abstract
“Warp drives are exotic solutions of general relativity that offer novel means of transportation. In this study, we present a solution for a constant-velocity subluminal warp drive that satisfies all of the energy conditions. The solution involves combining a stable matter shell with a shift vector distribution that closely matches well-known warp drive solutions such as the Alcubierre metric. We generate the spacetime metric numerically, evaluate the energy conditions, and confirm that the shift vector distribution cannot be reduced to a coordinate transformation. This study demonstrates that classic warp drive spacetimes can be made to satisfy the energy conditions by adding a regular matter shell with a positive ADM mass.”

Before I move on, a few definitions. ADM mass involves energy, and metric tensors is geek-speak for describing a space-time. I’ve put links in the footnotes.5

“In general relativity, the metric tensor (in this context often abbreviated to simply the metric) is the fundamental object of study. The metric captures all the geometric and causal structure of spacetime, being used to define notions such as time, distance, volume, curvature, angle, and separation of the future and the past….”
(Metric tensor (general relativity)) [emphasis mine]

A Testable Warp Solution: Exciting!

Fuchs et al. 'Figure 15: Diagram of the light-ray test. The emitters, detectors, and mirrors are comoving with the shell of interest. Note that both beams pass through the center, but are offset in the diagram for visual clarity. Emitter-detector B is vertically aligned with the mirrors on the left and emitter-detector A is vertically aligned with the mirrors on the right. Emitter-detectors A and B are equidistant to the center of the shell. The return path of the two light beams can be anywhere outside of the shell. The Warp Shell's warp effect is in the horizontal direction away from B and toward A.' (2024) from preprint draft.
From “Constant Velocity Physical Warp Drive Solution”, Fuschs et al. — how to test their idea. (2024)

Conclusion
“…This exciting new result offers an important first step toward understanding what makes physical warp solutions. Moreover, the warp drive spacetime constructed here is a new type of warp drive beyond the Natario class and hence not subject to the same scope discussed in [9] and [18] due to its use of modified spatial terms in the metric. This new solution shows that a more generic constant velocity warp drive spacetime can be constructed that satisfies the energy conditions.

“We intend to explore this solution further and find areas of optimization to improve the mass-to-velocity ratio required to maintain physicality….”
(“Constant Velocity Physical Warp Drive Solution“; Jared Fuchs, Christopher Helmerich, Alexey Bobrick, Luke Sellers, Brandon Melcher, Gianni Martire; preprint draft (May 4, 2024) via arXiv, Cornell University)

“Excited” pretty well sums up my reaction to this research. That’s not a common response. Not these days, not to this extent.

Collage: Apollo 11 Moon landing; July 16, 1969. A global, and historic, event.I graduated from high school shortly before the Apollo 11 landing. There’ve been quite few “exciting” events since then.

But this? For me, this is the biggest thing since I ran across “Warp Field Mechanics 101” on the NASA website: and the next day NASA (apparently) ‘went black’. I’ll talk about that a little later.

I do not think this means we’ll soon have fast interplanetary travel. Even though the scientists mention “exotic solutions” offering “novel means of transportation” and “passengers”.

“…1.2 Designing Warp Drive Spacetimes
“The transportation element of warp drives is about designing timelike curves for passengers to travel between points A and B in spacetime. In this paper, we will go about developing a warp solution in the following steps….”
(“Constant Velocity Physical Warp Drive Solution“; Jared Fuchs, Christopher Helmerich, Alexey Bobrick, Luke Sellers, Brandon Melcher, Gianni Martire; preprint draft (May 4, 2024) via arXiv, Cornell University)

What’s genuinely fascinating here is that their ideas can be tested, using light sources, detectors, mirrors, and a “stable shell of matter”: ordinary matter. Nothing exotic or hypothetical.

The only other example of practical “warp drive” laboratory test equipment I’ve run across is the 2011 White-Juday warp field interferometer.

The last I heard, the White-Juday warp field interferometer gave inconclusive results. If it generated space-time distortions, they could have been masked by electronic noise and ionized air.6

What astonished me about the White-Juday warp field interferometer was that scientists thought there was even a remote chance of (1) generating detectable space-time distortions (2) with contemporary technology.

ArchonMagnus' 'The Scientific Method as an Ongoing Process' diagram of the scientific method, an adaptation of a diagram by Whatiguana. (2015) From Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.This year’s revisiting of “warp drive” physics may also yield inconclusive results.

But — and I think this is important — these scientists outlined how others could test their ideas: and said they “intend to explore this solution further”.

No matter how the tests come out, we’ll be learning more about how space-time works.

Then, as Paul Sutter said, “…who knows what we’ll get once we understand gravity better.”


The Day “Warp Field Mechanics 101” Disappeared

AllenMcC.'s graphic: a two-dimensional illustration of an Alcubierre metric tensor. From Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.A little over 11 years back, I felt as if I’d dropped into a science fiction thriller. Briefly.

March 18, 2013. I’d been looking through NASA’s discussions of ‘next generation’ and ‘beyond next generation’ propulsion technology.

Two documents caught my eye:

My habits include downloading information for later study.

Usually it’s not necessary. This time it was.

March 19, 2013. I went back to the NASA website.

NASA wasn’t there. Apart from a few polite statements that data was not available.

NASA had gone black.

Classic Science Fiction Thriller (or) Another SNAFU

I’ve read enough stories to recognize a classic science fiction thriller plot.

But I was pretty sure that folks at NASA hadn’t inadvertently leaked Top Secret Stardrive Documents. Cool as that might have been.

As it turns out, someone had hacked into United States government databases.

Information Technology folks couldn’t tell exactly how much had been accessed.

Someone higher in the administrative food chain realized that at least some of the compromised data shouldn’t be shared with everyone. And so the whole NASA website went offline. Along with other U.S. government sites….

NASA eventually came back online, I stayed interested in “warp drive” research, and I talked about NASA ‘going black’ in 2013:

I didn’t find any references to the March, 2013, hacking incident then. I did this week: but only two. And I’m not sure about a 2018 reference to “an attack in 2013”.7

Anyway, I said I’d talk about the day NASA ‘went black’, and I still think it’s a good story.


History —

Esther C. Goddard's photo: Robert Goddard and his liquid fueled rocket: the world's first. (March 8, 1926) via Wikipedia, used w/o permission. Date cited by Wikipedia as coming from National Air and Space Museum, Smithsonian. see https://airandspace.si.edu/stories/editorial/robert-goddard-and-first-liquid-propellant-rocketHistory doesn’t repeat itself. Not exactly.

But I’ve noticed that patterns to recur.

So I could note that Konstantin Tsiolkovsky published his rocket equation in 1903, Robert H. Goddard launched the first liquid fueled rocket in 1926, and Apollo 11 landed on the Moon in 1969.

Then I could say that, since it was 23 years since Alcubierre first published his math, someone flight-tested a warp drive in 2017.

And that the first interstellar ship with a warp drive will reach Alpha Centauri in 2060: 43 years after the 2017 flight test, just like Goddard and Apollo.

I could, but I won’t. Paul Sutter was right. Variations on the Alcubierre drive would need something like dark matter. And nobody has observed such a thing. Not directly.

Einstein’s math suggests that dark matter could, hypothetically, exist. And if it does, then it explains oddities like the orbits of stars in spiral galaxies.

But even if it’s real, we’re not even close to manufacturing or collecting the stuff, let alone using it in a propulsion system.

I suspect a closer analog to Alcubierre’s 1994 letter to the editor might be William Moore’s “On the Motion of Rockets both in Nonresisting and Resisting Mediums”. (1810)

That paper wasn’t exactly lost, but it wasn’t widely available either.

So about a century later, Tsiolkovsky, Goddard, and Hermann Oberth came up with pretty much the same results. Independently.8 Which shouldn’t be surprising, since all four scientists were studying the same universe.

— And Being Human

SIO, NOAA, US Navy, NGA, GEBCO, image Landsat (04/09/2013) Rick Potts, Susan Antón, Leslie Aiello's image: oldest known spread of genus Homo, 1,900,000 to 1,700,000 years ago. (2013) via Smithsonian MagazineOne thing of the many that had changed, a century after William Moore’s research, was that technology was starting to catch up with the math.9 Awkward metaphor, but it’s Friday afternoon and I’ll let it stand.

Again, history doesn’t repeat itself: but I’ve noticed the occasional pattern emerge from humanity’s long story.

One thing that hasn’t changed in the uncounted ages before we started keeping written records is our wondering what’s over the next hill. We’re now living on every one of Earth’s continents; although I’ll grant that our Antarctic settlements are more camps than towns.

Even if something drastic happens in the next few decades, I’d be astounded if we don’t eventually get around to revisiting the Moon — following our robots to Mars — and finding a way of reaching the stars.

I’ve also noticed that at least some theoretical physicists have gone from saying that a warp drive is impossible — to showing ways it might work, once we develop the technology. And find something that’ll work like dark matter would.

Maybe — a century, or a millennium, from now — we’ll learn how to build warp drives.

Or maybe we’ll learn that there isn’t a fast way to the stars.

Either way, I think that’s where we’re headed.

I’ve talked about this sort of thing before:


1 Sound, light, physics, and technology:

2 Alcubierre’s letter to the editor and paper, 1994 and 2000? I haven’t learned the story behind that/those:

3 Mostly recent science, with a glance back at where we’ve been:

4 Mental imagery and a little math:

5 Three physicists, and ideas that I didn’t try discussing this week:

6 Applied physics, an Applied Physics outfit that’s not with Johns Hopkins University, the White-Juday warp field interferometer, and two (?) papers by Miguel Alcubierre:

7 That March, 2013, cybersecurity mess is almost entirely off the radar now:

8 Dark matter and dreamers:

9 Goddard’s March 16, 1926, test flight was the first; but as usual, it’s complicated:

Posted in Journal, Science News | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment